OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Tablets Methodology v1.0
Tablets Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are evaluated mathematically under Frontumo Tablets Methodology v1.0 using verified laboratory benchmarks, technical specifications, and authentic consumer ratings with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Tablets Methodology v1.0

Lg G Pad 8 0 WiFi (1GB + 16GB) Review | 168 Data compared

Avg. price:~£190RAM capacity:1 GBInternal storage:16 GBScreen size:8 inchesChipset:Qualcomm Snapdragon 400

Lg G Pad 8 0 WiFi (1GB + 16GB) Review: Compare 168 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Tablets category and whether it is worth buying.

5.2

Overall score

Score
5.2/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the smartphone's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best Tablets on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
Score components

90%

4.9

Technical score

10%

7.2

User score

â–¼Worse than 85% of tablets
4.9

Technical score

Technical score
4.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the smartphone's technical performance, covering eight key areas: performance & hardware, software, camera, connectivity, display, battery, audio, and design.
When it matters
When you want to compare Tablets based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
Score components

22%

4.8

Performance

20%

4.1

Display

16%

6.1

Camera

14%

2.7

Battery

12%

6.4

Connectivity

8%

5.9

Software & Features

5%

6.5

Design

3%

4.8

Audio & Multimedia

â–¼Worse than 89% of tablets
7.2

User score

User score
7.2/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the smartphone
When it matters
When you want to know how a smartphone handles daily tasks and how reliable it remains over time according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
Score components

70%

7.9

User ratings

30%

5.5

Number of reviews

Based on 130 buyer reviews from online shops.
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →
How we calculate this
User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.
Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.
â–¼Worse than 81% of tablets
  • lg-g-pad-8-0-1gb-16gb-wifi
  • lg-g-pad-8-0-1gb-16gb-wifi
  • lg-g-pad-8-0-1gb-16gb-wifi
  • lg-g-pad-8-0-1gb-16gb-wifi
  • lg-g-pad-8-0-1gb-16gb-wifi
  • lg-g-pad-8-0-1gb-16gb-wifi
lg-g-pad-8-0-1gb-16gb-wifi
lg-g-pad-8-0-1gb-16gb-wifi
lg-g-pad-8-0-1gb-16gb-wifi
lg-g-pad-8-0-1gb-16gb-wifi
lg-g-pad-8-0-1gb-16gb-wifi
lg-g-pad-8-0-1gb-16gb-wifi

Best prices

*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.

Best rankings

Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of tablet Lg G Pad 8 0 WiFi (1GB + 16GB)

Technical score
Technical score
4.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the smartphone's technical performance, covering eight key areas: performance & hardware, software, camera, connectivity, display, battery, audio, and design.
When it matters
When you want to compare Tablets based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
Score components:

22%

4.8

Performance

20%

4.1

Display

16%

6.1

Camera

14%

2.7

Battery

12%

6.4

Connectivity

8%

5.9

Software & Features

5%

6.5

Design

3%

4.8

Audio & Multimedia

4.9
User score
User score
7.2/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the smartphone
When it matters
When you want to know how a smartphone handles daily tasks and how reliable it remains over time according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
Score components

70%

7.9

User ratings

30%

5.5

Number of reviews

Based on 130 buyer reviews from online shops.
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →
How we calculate this
User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.
Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.
7.2
Popularity
Popularity
5.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the smartphone.
When it matters
When you prefer to purchase a product chosen and reviewed by many other consumers.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 55% of models
Popularity:
Lg G Pad 8 0 WiFi (1GB + 16GB) has a user popularity of 5.5 points, which is lower than 54.9% of Tablets.
5.5
Value for money
Value for money
6.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the smartphone's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a smartphone with a good balance between quality and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
Score components:

60%

5.2

Overall score

40%

9.5

Price

6.5
RAM capacity
1 GB
RAM capacity
1 GB
â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
Market range: <2 GB – >12 GB
This tablet has a RAM capacity of 1 GB which is smaller than the RAM capacity of 77.8% of tablets and equal to that of 19.3% of tablets.
Process node
28 nm
Process node
28 nm
â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >40 nm
This tablet is built on a 28 nm process node, which is larger than the node size used in 64.7% of tablets and equal to the node used in 17.8% of tablets.
Internal storage
16 GB
Internal storage
16 GB
â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
Market range: <0 GB – >250 GB
This tablet has an internal storage capacity of 16 GB which is smaller than the storage of 78.5% of tablets and equal to that of 15% of tablets.
Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
?
Chipset
Qualcomm Snapdragon 400
Chipset
Qualcomm Snapdragon 400
â–² Better than 51% of models
This tablet uses the Qualcomm Snapdragon 400 chipset, which is more advanced than the chipsets in 51.1% of tablets and equal to those in 1% of tablets.
Show more
Screen resolution
1280×800
Screen resolution
1280×800
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
This tablet has a screen resolution of 1280×800 which is lower than that of 68.1% of tablets and equal to that of 21.7% of tablets.
Refresh rate
60 Hz
Refresh rate
60 Hz
â–¼ Worse than 26% of models
Market range: <60 Hz – >120 Hz
This tablet supports a refresh rate of 60 Hz which is equal to that in 73.8% of tablets.
Display type
IPS LCD
Display type
IPS LCD
â–² Better than 17% of models
This tablet uses a IPS LCD display type. 17% of tablets use this display technology.
Pixel density
189 ppi
Pixel density
189 ppi
â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
Market range: <149 ppi – >291 ppi
This tablet has a pixel density of 189 ppi which is lower than that of 66.5% of tablets and equal to that of 6.8% of tablets.
Display glass type
Corning Gorilla Glass
Display glass type
Corning Gorilla Glass
â–² Better than 45% of models
This tablet uses Corning Gorilla Glass display glass which is stronger than that on 45.4% of tablets and equal to that on 32.7% of tablets.
Show more
Optical image stabilization
no
Optical image stabilization
no
Category Benchmark
This tablet does not support optical image stabilization. 0.4% of tablets include OIS.
Main camera megapixels
5 MP
Main camera megapixels
5 MP
â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
Market range: <3.15 MP – >13 MP
This tablet has a main camera resolution of 5 MP which is lower than that of 63.6% of tablets and equal to that of 26% of tablets.
Front camera megapixels
1.3 MP
Front camera megapixels
1.3 MP
â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
Market range: <1.2 MP – >9 MP
This tablet has a front camera resolution of 1.3 MP which is lower than in 80.8% of tablets and equal to that in 5.5% of tablets.
Main camera aperture
?
Optical zoom
1xxx
Optical zoom
1xx
â–² Better than 18% of models
This tablet supports 1xx optical zoom which is higher than in 18.4% of tablets and equal to that in 80.7% of tablets.
Show more
Battery capacity
4,200 mAh
Battery capacity
4,200 mAh
â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
Market range: <4k mAh – >10.1k mAh
This tablet has a battery capacity of 4,200 mAh which is smaller than the batteries in 81.6% of tablets and equal to those in 1.2% of tablets.
Charging speed
10 W
Charging speed
10 W
â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
Market range: <10 W – >60 W
This tablet supports charging speeds of 10 W which is slower than in 61% of tablets and equal to speeds in 33.2% of tablets.
Battery life
7 hours
Battery life
7 hours
â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
Market range: <6 hours – >16 hours
This tablet has a battery life of 7 hours, which is shorter than that of 85.4% of tablets and equal to that of 5.5% of tablets.
Wireless charging
no
Wireless charging
no
â–¼ Worse than 2% of models
This tablet does not support wireless charging. 1.5% of tablets support wireless charging.
Fast charging
no
Fast charging
no
â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
This tablet does not support fast charging. 49.7% of tablets support fast charging.
Show more
LTE support
yes
LTE support
yes
â–² Better than 37% of models
This tablet supports LTE. 36.8% of tablets include LTE connectivity.
Wi-Fi connectivity
yes
Wi-Fi connectivity
yes
Category Benchmark
This tablet supports Wi-Fi connectivity. 0.2% of tablets offer Wi-Fi support.
GPS
yes
GPS
yes
â–² Better than 17% of models
This tablet supports GPS. 17.3% of tablets include GPS functionality.
5G connectivity
no
5G connectivity
no
â–¼ Worse than 11% of models
This tablet does not support 5G connectivity. 11.1% of tablets support 5G.
NFC
no
NFC
no
â–¼ Worse than 11% of models
This tablet does not support NFC. 10.9% of tablets support NFC.
Show more
Operating system
Android
Operating system
Android
â–² Better than 23% of models
This tablet uses the Android operating system, which is more advanced than the one used by 23.3%.
Update support duration
short
Update support duration
short
â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
This tablet offers short update support, which is shorter than the support period of 52.7% of tablets and equal to that of 47.3% of tablets.
Direct OS updates
no
Direct OS updates
no
â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
This tablet does not receive direct OS updates. 79.7% of tablets receive direct updates.
On-device AI
no
On-device AI
no
â–¼ Worse than 28% of models
This tablet does not support on-device AI. 28.3% of tablets support this capability.
App tracking protection
no
App tracking protection
no
â–¼ Worse than 28% of models
This tablet does not include app tracking protection. 28.3% of tablets include app tracking protection.
Show more
IP rating
not rated
IP rating
not rated
â–¼ Worse than 16% of models
This tablet has an IP rating of not rated which is lower than that of 16.3% of tablets and equal to that of 83.7% of tablets.
Weight
342 g
Weight
342 g
â–² Better than 83% of models
Market range: <315 g – >730 g
This tablet weighs 342 g which is lighter than 83.4% of tablets and equal to the weight of 0.2% of tablets.
Backlit keyboard
no
Backlit keyboard
no
â–¼ Worse than 10% of models
This tablet does not support a backlit keyboard. 9.8% of tablets support backlit keyboards.
Keyboard accessory
no
Keyboard accessory
no
â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
This tablet does not support a keyboard accessory. 84.3% of tablets support this option.
Pen latency
N/A
Show more
Number of microphones
1
Number of microphones
1
â–¼ Worse than 45% of models
Market range: <0 – >5
This tablet includes 1 microphones, which is more than in 0.2% of tablets and equal to the number in 54.8% of tablets.
aptX Adaptive
no
aptX Adaptive
no
â–¼ Worse than 7% of models
This tablet does not support aptX Adaptive. 6.9% of tablets offer this codec.
Dolby Atmos support
no
Dolby Atmos support
no
â–¼ Worse than 31% of models
This tablet does not support Dolby Atmos. 31.5% of tablets support Dolby Atmos.
N. of speakers
2
N. of speakers
2
â–¼ Worse than 29% of models
Market range: <1 – >6
This tablet includes 2 speakers, which is more than in 9.8% of tablets and equal to the number in 60.9% of tablets.
FM radio
yes
FM radio
yes
â–² Better than 81% of models
This tablet includes an FM radio. 81.1% of tablets offer FM radio functionality.
Show more

Lg G Pad 8 0 WiFi (1GB + 16GB) vs the average tablet

246810TotalPerformanceDisplayCameraBatteryConnectivitySoftware & FeaturesDesignAudio & Multimedia
  • More capable chipset
    Chipset
    Qualcomm Snapdragon 400
    â–² Better than 51% of models
    This tablet uses the Qualcomm Snapdragon 400 chipset, while the average tablet uses MediaTek MT8169A.
    Qualcomm Snapdragon 400 vs MediaTek MT8169A
  • Better GPU
    GPU model
    Adreno 305
    â–² Better than 73% of models
    This tablet uses the Adreno 305 GPU, while the average tablet uses Mali-G51. GPU choice is one of the main performance differences between tablets.
    Adreno 305 vs Mali-G51
  • Includes stylus
    Stylus included
    yes
    â–² Better than 83% of models
    This tablet includes a stylus, the average tablet does not. 16.9% of tablets come with a stylus.
  • 30.2% lighter
    Weight
    342 g
    â–² Better than 83% of models
    Market range: <315 g – >730 g
    This tablet is lighter than the average tablet (342 g vs 490 g). The average tablet weighs 490 g.
    342 g vs 490 g
  • Allows manual ISO
    Manual ISO
    yes
    â–² Better than 54% of models
    This tablet allows manual ISO adjustment, the average tablet does not. 46% of tablets feature manual ISO.
  • 51.1 mm narrower
    Width
    124.2 mm
    â–² Better than 89% of models
    Market range: <123.8 mm – >274 mm
    This tablet is narrower than the average tablet (124.2 mm vs 175.3 mm). The average tablet is 175.3 mm wide.
    124.2 mm vs 175.3 mm
  • More capable chipset
    Chipset
    Qualcomm Snapdragon 400
    â–² Better than 51% of models
    This tablet uses the Qualcomm Snapdragon 400 chipset, while the average tablet uses MediaTek MT8169A.
    Qualcomm Snapdragon 400 vs MediaTek MT8169A
  • Better GPU
    GPU model
    Adreno 305
    â–² Better than 73% of models
    This tablet uses the Adreno 305 GPU, while the average tablet uses Mali-G51. GPU choice is one of the main performance differences between tablets.
    Adreno 305 vs Mali-G51
  • Allows manual ISO
    Manual ISO
    yes
    â–² Better than 54% of models
    This tablet allows manual ISO adjustment, the average tablet does not. 46% of tablets feature manual ISO.
  • 30.2% lighter
    Weight
    342 g
    â–² Better than 83% of models
    Market range: <315 g – >730 g
    This tablet is lighter than the average tablet (342 g vs 490 g). The average tablet weighs 490 g.
    342 g vs 490 g
  • Includes stylus
    Stylus included
    yes
    â–² Better than 83% of models
    This tablet includes a stylus, the average tablet does not. 16.9% of tablets come with a stylus.
  • 51.1 mm narrower
    Width
    124.2 mm
    â–² Better than 89% of models
    Market range: <123.8 mm – >274 mm
    This tablet is narrower than the average tablet (124.2 mm vs 175.3 mm). The average tablet is 175.3 mm wide.
    124.2 mm vs 175.3 mm
  • 3.7 MP lower front camera megapixels
    Front camera megapixels
    1.3 MP
    â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
    Market range: <1.2 MP – >9 MP
    This tablet has less front camera megapixels than the average tablet (1.3 MP vs 5 MP). The average tablet has 5 MP front camera resolution.
    1.3 MP vs 5 MP
  • No USB Type-C
    USB Type-C
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This tablet lacks a USB Type-C port, the average tablet includes one. 53.4% of tablets use USB Type-C.
  • 3 GB less RAM
    RAM capacity
    1 GB
    â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
    Market range: <2 GB – >12 GB
    This tablet has less RAM capacity than the average tablet (1 GB vs 4 GB). The average tablet has 4 GB of RAM.
    1 GB vs 4 GB
  • 3 hours shorter battery life
    Battery life
    7 hours
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    Market range: <6 hours – >16 hours
    This tablet offers shorter battery life than the average tablet (7 hours vs 10 hours). The average tablet offers 10 hours of battery life.
    7 hours vs 10 hours
  • Shorter update support
    Update support duration
    short
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This tablet offers shorter update support than the average tablet (short vs medium). The average tablet gets medium of update support.
    short vs medium
  • 40% lower CPU speed
    CPU speed
    1.2 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
    Market range: <1.2 GHz – >3.2 GHz
    This tablet has a lower CPU speed than the average tablet (1.2 GHz vs 2 GHz). The average tablet has CPU speed of 2 GHz.
    1.2 GHz vs 2 GHz
  • Does not receive direct OS updates
    Direct OS updates
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
    This tablet does not support direct OS updates, the average tablet does. 79.7% of tablets support direct OS updates.
  • 36.2% smaller battery capacity
    Battery capacity
    4,200 mAh
    â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
    Market range: <4k mAh – >10.1k mAh
    This tablet has a lower battery capacity than the average tablet (4200 mAh vs 6580 mAh). The average tablet battery has capacity of 6580 mAh.
    4,200 mAh vs 6,580 mAh
  • 10.7% lower user score
    User score
    7.2/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the smartphone
    When it matters
    When you want to know how a smartphone handles daily tasks and how reliable it remains over time according to user feedback.
    Score distribution
    ▼▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    Lg G Pad 8 0 WiFi
    the average tablet
    Lg G Pad 8 0 WiFi (1GB + 16GB) has a lower user score than the average tablet (7.23 vs 8.000).
    7.23 vs 8
  • 9.7% worse value for money
    Lg G Pad 8 0 WiFi (1GB + 16GB) has worse value for money than the average tablet (6.47 vs 7.1).
    6.47 vs 7.1
  • 3 GB less RAM
    RAM capacity
    1 GB
    â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
    Market range: <2 GB – >12 GB
    This tablet has less RAM capacity than the average tablet (1 GB vs 4 GB). The average tablet has 4 GB of RAM.
    1 GB vs 4 GB
  • 40% lower CPU speed
    CPU speed
    1.2 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
    Market range: <1.2 GHz – >3.2 GHz
    This tablet has a lower CPU speed than the average tablet (1.2 GHz vs 2 GHz). The average tablet has CPU speed of 2 GHz.
    1.2 GHz vs 2 GHz
  • 75% less storage
    Internal storage
    16 GB
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
    Market range: <0 GB – >250 GB
    This tablet has less internal storage than the average tablet (16 GB vs 64 GB). The average tablet provides 64 GB of internal storage.
    16 GB vs 64 GB
  • 2x larger process node
    Process node
    28 nm
    â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >40 nm
    This tablet uses a larger process node than the average tablet (28 nm vs 14 nm). The average tablet uses a process node of 14 nm.
    28 nm vs 14 nm
  • 2 fewer CPU threads
    CPU threads
    4
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This tablet has less CPU threads than the average tablet (4 vs 6). The average tablet has 6 CPU threads.
    4 vs 6
  • No big.LITTLE architecture
    big.LITTLE Architecture
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    This tablet does not use a big.LITTLE architecture, the average tablet does. 51.3% of tablets use a big.LITTLE architecture.
  • 64.4% lower memory bandwidth
    Memory bandwidth
    5.3 GB/s
    â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
    Market range: <4.26 GB/s – >60 GB/s
    This tablet has a lower memory bandwidth than the average tablet (5.3 GB/s vs 14.9 GB/s). The average tablet has memory bandwidth of 14.9 GB/s.
    5.3 GB/s vs 14.9 GB/s
  • 800 MHz slower RAM speed
    RAM speed
    1,066 MHz
    â–¼ Worse than 73% of models
    Market range: <800 MHz – >6.4k MHz
    This tablet has a lower RAM speed than the average tablet (1066 MHz vs 1866 MHz). The average tablet has RAM speed of 1866 MHz.
    1,066 MHz vs 1,866 MHz
  • 30.8% slower GPU clock
    GPU frequency
    450 MHz
    â–¼ Worse than 71% of models
    Market range: <311 MHz – >1.1k MHz
    This tablet has a lower GPU frequency than the average tablet (450 MHz vs 650 MHz). The average tablet has GPU frequency of 650 MHz.
    450 MHz vs 650 MHz
  • Older DDR memory version
    DDR memory version
    LPDDR2
    â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
    This tablet uses an older DDR memory version than the average tablet (LPDDR2 vs LPDDR3). The average tablet uses DDR version LPDDR3.
    LPDDR2 vs LPDDR3
  • 70 nits lower peak brightness
    Peak brightness
    331 nits
    â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
    Market range: <320 nits – >750 nits
    This tablet has a lower peak brightness than the average tablet (331 nits vs 401 nits). The average tablet reaches 401 nits peak brightness.
    331 nits vs 401 nits
  • Lower screen resolution
    Screen resolution
    1280×800
    â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
    This tablet has a lower screen resolution than the average tablet (1280×800 vs 1920×1200). The average tablet has a resolution of 1920×1200.
    1280×800 vs 1920×1200
  • 69 nits lower typical brightness
    Typical brightness
    331 nits
    â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
    Market range: <300 nits – >600 nits
    This tablet has a lower typical brightness than the average tablet (331 nits vs 400 nits). The average tablet reaches 400 nits typical brightness.
    331 nits vs 400 nits
  • 2.1 inches smaller screen size
    Screen size
    8 inches
    â–¼ Worse than 76% of models
    Market range: <7 inches – >12 inches
    This tablet has a lower screen size than the average tablet (8 inches vs 10.1 inches). The average tablet has screen size of 10.1 inches.
    8 inches vs 10.1 inches
  • Lower contrast ratio
    Contrast ratio
    800:1
    â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
    This tablet has a lower contrast ratio than the average tablet (800:1 vs 1015:1). The average tablet has a contrast ratio of 1015:1.
    800:1 vs 1,015:1
  • 15.6% lower pixel density
    Pixel density
    189 ppi
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <149 ppi – >291 ppi
    This tablet has a lower pixel density than the average tablet (189 ppi vs 224 ppi). The average tablet has pixel density of 224 ppi.
    189 ppi vs 224 ppi
  • 32 ppi lower screen sharpness
    Screen sharpness
    189 ppi
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    Market range: <149 ppi – >291 ppi
    This tablet has a lower screen sharpness than the average tablet (189 ppi vs 221 ppi). The average tablet has screen sharpness of 221 ppi.
    189 ppi vs 221 ppi
  • 50% lower touch sampling rate
    Touch sampling rate
    60 Hz
    â–¼ Worse than 58% of models
    Market range: <60 Hz – >300 Hz
    This tablet has a lower touch sampling rate than the average tablet (60 Hz vs 120 Hz). The average tablet has touch sampling rate of 120 Hz.
    60 Hz vs 120 Hz
  • 3.7 MP lower front camera megapixels
    Front camera megapixels
    1.3 MP
    â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
    Market range: <1.2 MP – >9 MP
    This tablet has less front camera megapixels than the average tablet (1.3 MP vs 5 MP). The average tablet has 5 MP front camera resolution.
    1.3 MP vs 5 MP
  • 3 MP lower main camera megapixels
    Main camera megapixels
    5 MP
    â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
    Market range: <3.15 MP – >13 MP
    This tablet has a lower-resolution main camera than the average tablet (5 MP vs 8 MP). The average tablet has a 8 MP main camera.
    5 MP vs 8 MP
  • No manual white balance
    Manual white balance
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 52% of models
    This tablet does not allow manual white balance adjustments, the average tablet does. 51.6% of tablets include white balance controls.
  • 3 hours shorter battery life
    Battery life
    7 hours
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    Market range: <6 hours – >16 hours
    This tablet offers shorter battery life than the average tablet (7 hours vs 10 hours). The average tablet offers 10 hours of battery life.
    7 hours vs 10 hours
  • 36.2% smaller battery capacity
    Battery capacity
    4,200 mAh
    â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
    Market range: <4k mAh – >10.1k mAh
    This tablet has a lower battery capacity than the average tablet (4200 mAh vs 6580 mAh). The average tablet battery has capacity of 6580 mAh.
    4,200 mAh vs 6,580 mAh
  • 44.4% slower charging speed
    Charging speed
    10 W
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
    Market range: <10 W – >60 W
    This tablet supports slower charging than the average tablet (10 W vs 18 W). The average tablet supports charging speed of 18 W.
    10 W vs 18 W
  • No USB Type-C
    USB Type-C
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This tablet lacks a USB Type-C port, the average tablet includes one. 53.4% of tablets use USB Type-C.
  • Older Wi-Fi version
    Wi-Fi version
    Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n)
    â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
    This tablet uses an older Wi-Fi version than the average tablet (Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)). The average tablet uses Wi-Fi Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac).
    Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)
  • Older Bluetooth version
    Bluetooth version
    4.0
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
    This tablet uses an older Bluetooth version than the average tablet (4 vs 5). The average tablet uses Bluetooth 5.0.
    4.0 vs 5.0
  • No Ethernet support
    Ethernet support
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 76% of models
    This tablet does not have Ethernet support, the average tablet does. 76.3% of tablets support Ethernet.
  • Shorter update support
    Update support duration
    short
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This tablet offers shorter update support than the average tablet (short vs medium). The average tablet gets medium of update support.
    short vs medium
  • Does not receive direct OS updates
    Direct OS updates
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
    This tablet does not support direct OS updates, the average tablet does. 79.7% of tablets support direct OS updates.
  • No picture-in-picture mode
    Picture-in-picture
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
    This tablet does not support picture-in-picture, the average tablet does. 61% of tablets support picture-in-picture.
  • No camera/mic privacy toggles
    Camera/mic privacy
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
    This tablet lacks camera and microphone privacy toggles, the average tablet includes them. 56.2% of tablets offer these toggles.
  • No full-page screenshots
    Full-page screenshots
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This tablet does not support full-page screenshots, the average tablet does. 52.5% of tablets support full-page screenshots.
  • No location privacy controls
    Location privacy
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 76% of models
    This tablet does not offer location privacy controls, the average tablet does. 76.5% of tablets include location privacy features.
  • No dark mode
    Dark mode
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 57% of models
    This tablet does not support dark mode, the average tablet does. 57.2% of tablets have dark mode.
  • No keyboard accessory
    Keyboard accessory
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
    This tablet does not support a keyboard accessory, the average tablet does. 84.2% of tablets support a keyboard accessory.
  • 1.9 mm thicker
    Thickness
    9.9 mm
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
    Market range: <6.1 mm – >11.5 mm
    This tablet is thicker than the average tablet (9.9 mm vs 8 mm). The average tablet is 8.0 mm thick.
    9.9 mm vs 8.0 mm
  • 5 older release date
    Release date
    2014
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    Market range: <2k – >2k
    This tablet is an older model than the average tablet (2014 vs 2019).
    July 2014
    2014 vs 2019

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

T
trustedreviews.com
12/12/2014
Summary of the review
LG G Pad 8.0 Review - Trusted Reviews(www.notebookcheck.net) | 26 September 2014 | LG G Pad 8.0 V480 Tablet Review
T
trustedreviews.com
12/12/2014
Summary of the review
Camera, Battery Life and Verdict - Trusted Reviews Do you need technical benchmarks or specific performance comparisons between this V480 model and th...
H
hifitest.de
14/04/2015
Summary of the review
LG G Pad 8.0 - Tablets im Test - sehr gut - hifitest.de
(Translated)Show original
C
connect.de
18/12/2014
Summary of the review
LG G Pad 8.0 im Test - Connect
(Translated)Show original
N
netzleben.com
03/07/2015
Summary of the review
LG G Pad 8.0 im Test - Netzleben
(Translated)Show original
Q
quechoisir.org
22/10/2026
Summary of the review
Test LG G Pad 8.0 - Tablette tactile
(Translated)Show original
L
lesnumeriques.com
09/07/2014
Summary of the review
LG G Pad 8.0 (V480): meilleur prix - Les Numériques
(Translated)Show original
T
techdifferent.it
13/11/2014
Summary of the review
Recensione LG G Pad 8.0 - TechDifferent
(Translated)Show original
T
tech.everyeye.it
13/02/2015
Summary of the review
Recensione LG G Pad 8 - Everyeye Tech
(Translated)Show original
C
consumentenbond.nl
Unknown Date
Summary of the review
LG G Pad 8.0 - Test, Reviews & Prijzen - Consumentenbond
(Translated)Show original
T
techpulse.be
20/11/2014
Summary of the review
LG G Pad 8 - TechPulse
(Translated)Show original
A
androidplanet.nl
01/08/2014
Summary of the review
LG G Pad: Alles over de LG-tablets - Android Planet
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

Based on 130 buyer reviews from online shops.
Reviews last updated: May 2026 · How we calculate this
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →

What we like about Lg G Pad 8 0 WiFi (1GB + 16GB)

  • Comfortable and lightweight design with rounded edges that make it easy to hold for long periods.
  • Presence of a full-size USB port on certain models, which is rare for tablets and useful for connecting peripherals.
  • Expandable storage via a microSD card slot.
  • Useful software features like QPair for syncing with LG smartphones and a built-in IR blaster for use as a TV remote.
  • Clear and accurate display colors for media consumption.

What we don't like about Lg G Pad 8 0 WiFi (1GB + 16GB)

  • Sluggish performance due to a mid-range processor and limited (often 1GB) RAM, leading to lag during multitasking or app switching.
  • Limited internal storage, with some users reporting less than 3GB of free space after pre-installed apps.
  • Average to poor camera quality that lacks a flash, making it unsuitable for low-light photography.
  • Subpar audio quality from rear-facing speakers that can sound 'tinny' or distorted at high volumes.
  • Screen brightness is lower than many competitors, making it difficult to use in bright outdoor environments.

Verdict

The LG G Pad 8.0 WiFi (V480) is a compact budget tablet featuring an 8.0-inch IPS LCD with a 1280x800 resolution and a 4,200 mAh battery. It is powered by a 1.2 GHz quad-core Snapdragon 400 processor with 1GB of RAM and 16GB of internal storage, which is expandable via a microSD slot. Main pros include its lightweight, portable design with rounded corners for easy one-handed gripping and useful software features like QPair for smartphone syncing, Knock Code for security, and Dual Window for multitasking. However, it suffers from dated performance that can lead to app-switching delays, a low-resolution display compared to rivals, and basic 5MP rear and 1.3MP front cameras that lack exceptional detail and a flash.

Compare Lg G Pad 8 0 WiFi (1GB + 16GB) with other tablets

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Lg G Pad 8 0 WiFi (1GB + 16GB) and other tablets

No results found