OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Tablets Methodology v3.0
Tablets Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Tablets Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Tablets Methodology v3.0

LG Optimus Pad WiFi (1GB + 32GB) review: 168 specs compared

Avg. price:~£700RAM capacity:1 GBInternal storage:32 GBScreen size:8.9 inchesChipset:Nvidia Tegra 2 T20

LG Optimus Pad WiFi (1GB + 32GB) Review: Compare 168 technical specifications and 15 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Tablets category and whether it is worth buying.

LG Optimus Pad WiFi (1GB + 32GB)
5.8/10

Overall score

Score
5.8/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, best-of lists, expert reviews and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 35%, List score 30%, Reviews score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 93% of models
Score components

35%

4.8

Technical score

30%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

4.8

Reviews score

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 6.9, the mark of a weaker model in this category

▼Worse than 93% of tablets
6.1

Value for money

Value for money
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the tablet's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a tablet with a good balance between quality and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components

70%

5.8

Overall score

30%

6.8

Price

▼Worse than 99%
4.8

Technical score

Technical score
4.8/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 35% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 94% of models
Score components

22%

3.7

Performance

20%

4.4

Display

16%

5.8

Camera

14%

4.3

Battery

12%

5.8

Connectivity

8%

5.3

Software

5%

5.2

Design

3%

5.7

Audio

▼Worse than 94%
4.8

Reviews score

Reviews score
4.8/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.4 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 95% of models

4.8

Mark 7.2 is below the typical mark 7.8 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.0

Average grade

20%

8.1

Popularity

Grades by review (15)
9 reviews: 5 with a printed score, 4 estimated from the review. 6 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▼Worse than 95%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 30% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • lg-optimus-pad-1gb-32gb-wifi
  • lg-optimus-pad-1gb-32gb-wifi
  • lg-optimus-pad-1gb-32gb-wifi
  • lg-optimus-pad-1gb-32gb-wifi
  • lg-optimus-pad-1gb-32gb-wifi
  • lg-optimus-pad-1gb-32gb-wifi
lg-optimus-pad-1gb-32gb-wifi
lg-optimus-pad-1gb-32gb-wifi
lg-optimus-pad-1gb-32gb-wifi
lg-optimus-pad-1gb-32gb-wifi
lg-optimus-pad-1gb-32gb-wifi
lg-optimus-pad-1gb-32gb-wifi
Where to buy
*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.

What reviewers say about the LG Optimus Pad WiFi (1GB + 32GB)

Based on 9 · 7

Reviewers like the fast performance, 3D recording and camera, but complain about the high price, limited storage and poor 3D playback.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of tablet LG Optimus Pad WiFi (1GB + 32GB)

Technical score
Technical score
4.8/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 35% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 94% of models
Score components:

22%

3.7

Performance

20%

4.4

Display

16%

5.8

Camera

14%

4.3

Battery

12%

5.8

Connectivity

8%

5.3

Software

5%

5.2

Design

3%

5.7

Audio

4.8
Reviews score
4.8
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the tablet's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a tablet with a good balance between quality and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components:

70%

5.8

Overall score

30%

6.8

Price

6.1
RAM capacity
1 GB
Market range: <1 GB – >8 GB
This tablet has 1 GB of RAM, which is less than 78% of tablets and equal to 19.1% of tablets.
Process node
40 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >40 nm
This tablet is built on a 40 nm process, which is larger than 86.9% of tablets and equal to 8% of tablets.
Internal storage
32 GB
Market range: <16 GB – >256 GB
This tablet has 32 GB of internal storage, which is less than 60.9% of tablets and equal to 17.9% of tablets.
Geekbench 6 single-core score
?
Chipset
Nvidia Tegra 2 T20
This tablet runs on Nvidia Tegra 2 T20, which is less advanced than 70.5% of tablets and equal to 2.6% of tablets.
Show more
What reviewers say
Screen resolution
1280×768
This tablet has a 1280×768 screen, which is less sharp than 89.8% of tablets and equal to 0.1% of tablets.
Refresh rate
60 Hz
Market range: <60 Hz – >120 Hz
This tablet has a 60 Hz screen, which is smoother than 0.1% of tablets and equal to 73.4% of tablets.
Display type
IPS LCD
This tablet uses a IPS LCD display type. 17% of tablets use this display technology.
Pixel density
168 ppi
Market range: <149 ppi – >291 ppi
This tablet has a pixel density of 168 ppi, which is lower than 81.7% of tablets and equal to 0.4% of tablets.
Display glass type
Tempered Glass
This tablet protects its screen with Tempered Glass, which is less durable than 78% of tablets and the same as 19.6% of tablets.
Show more
What reviewers say
Optical image stabilization
no
This tablet does not support optical stabilisation. 0.4% of tablets offer this.
Main camera megapixels
5 MP
Market range: <3.15 MP – >13 MP
This tablet has a rear camera with 5 MP resolution, which is lower than 63.7% of tablets and equal to 26% of tablets.
Front camera megapixels
2 MP
Market range: <1.2 MP – >9 MP
This tablet has a front camera with 2 MP resolution, which is lower than 53.8% of tablets and equal to 25.5% of tablets.
Main camera aperture
?
Optical zoom
1xxx
This tablet has 1xx optical zoom, which is stronger than 18.2% of tablets and equal to 80.9% of tablets.
Show more
What reviewers say
Battery capacity
6,400 mAh
Market range: <4k mAh – >10.1k mAh
This tablet has 6,400 mAh battery capacity, which is smaller than 52% of tablets and equal to 0.5% of tablets.
Charging speed
10 W
Market range: <10 W – >45 W
This tablet charges at 10 W, which is slower than 60.9% of tablets and equal to 33.3% of tablets.
Battery life
9.7 hours
Market range: <7 hours – >16 hours
This tablet has a battery life of 9.7 hours, which is shorter than that of 61% of tablets and equal to that of 0.4% of tablets.
Wireless charging
no
This tablet does not support wireless charging. 1.5% of tablets offer this.
Fast charging
no
This tablet does not support fast charging. 56.9% of tablets offer this.
Show more
LTE support
no
This tablet does not have built-in LTE. 42.9% of tablets offer this.
Wi-Fi connectivity
yes
This tablet connects to Wi-Fi. 0.2% of tablets offer this.
GPS
yes
This tablet has built-in GPS. 17.1% of tablets offer this.
5G connectivity
no
This tablet does not support 5G. 8.1% of tablets offer this.
NFC
no
This tablet does not include NFC. 10.8% of tablets offer this.
Show more
Operating system
Android
This tablet uses the Android operating system, which is more advanced than the one used by 23.2%.
Update support duration
short
This tablet offers short update support, which is shorter than the support period of 52.4% of tablets and equal to that of 47.6% of tablets.
Direct OS updates
no
This tablet does not support direct OS updates. 79.8% of tablets offer this.
On-device AI
no
This tablet does not support on-device AI. 28.3% of tablets support this capability.
App tracking protection
yes
This tablet supports app tracking protection. 71.6% of tablets offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say
IP rating
not rated
This tablet's IP rating is not rated, which is less protected than 16.5% of tablets and the same as 83.6% of tablets.
Weight
497 g
Market range: <315 g – >730 g
This tablet weighs 497 g, which is heavier than 52% of tablets and equal to 0.1% of tablets.
Backlit keyboard
no
This tablet does not support a backlit keyboard. 9.7% of tablets support backlit keyboards.
Keyboard accessory
?
Pen latency
N/A
Show more
What reviewers say
Number of microphones
1
Market range: <1 – >3
This tablet has a microphone array of 1, which is more than 0.2% of tablets and equal to 54.8% of tablets.
aptX Adaptive
no
This tablet does not support aptX Adaptive. 6.9% of tablets offer this.
Dolby Atmos support
no
This tablet does not support Dolby Atmos. 31.3% of tablets support Dolby Atmos.
N. of speakers
3
Market range: <2 – >4
This tablet includes 3 speakers, which is more than in 70.6% of tablets and equal to the number in 0.2% of tablets.
FM radio
no
This tablet does not include an FM radio. 19% of tablets offer this.
Show more

LG Optimus Pad WiFi (1GB + 32GB) vs the average tablet

246810TotalPerformanceDisplayCameraBatteryConnectivitySoftwareDesignAudio
  • 1 more speakers
    This tablet has more speakers than the average tablet (3 vs 2). The average tablet has 2 speakers.
    3 vs 2
  • Supports app tracking protection
    This tablet supports app tracking protection, while the average tablet does not. 28.4% of tablets offer this.
  • More advanced chipset
    This tablet has a more advanced chipset than the average tablet (Nvidia Tegra 2 T20 vs MediaTek MT8169A).
    Nvidia Tegra 2 T20 vs MediaTek MT8169A
  • Built-in camera flash
    This tablet has a camera flash, while the average tablet does not. 45.5% of tablets have one.
  • Supports HDMI output
    This tablet supports HDMI output, while the average tablet does not. 49.8% of tablets offer this.
  • 4 more GPU execution units
    This tablet has more GPU execution units than the average tablet (8 vs 4). The average tablet has 4 GPU execution units.
    8 vs 4
  • 50 mm shorter
    This tablet is shorter than the average tablet (150 mm vs 200 mm). The average tablet is 200 mm tall.
    150 mm vs 200 mm
  • 25.3 mm narrower
    This tablet is narrower than the average tablet (150 mm vs 175.3 mm). The average tablet is 175.3 mm wide.
    150 mm vs 175.3 mm
  • More advanced chipset
    This tablet has a more advanced chipset than the average tablet (Nvidia Tegra 2 T20 vs MediaTek MT8169A).
    Nvidia Tegra 2 T20 vs MediaTek MT8169A
  • 4 more GPU execution units
    This tablet has more GPU execution units than the average tablet (8 vs 4). The average tablet has 4 GPU execution units.
    8 vs 4
  • Built-in camera flash
    This tablet has a camera flash, while the average tablet does not. 45.5% of tablets have one.
  • Supports HDMI output
    This tablet supports HDMI output, while the average tablet does not. 49.8% of tablets offer this.
  • Supports app tracking protection
    This tablet supports app tracking protection, while the average tablet does not. 28.4% of tablets offer this.
  • 50 mm shorter
    This tablet is shorter than the average tablet (150 mm vs 200 mm). The average tablet is 200 mm tall.
    150 mm vs 200 mm
  • 25.3 mm narrower
    This tablet is narrower than the average tablet (150 mm vs 175.3 mm). The average tablet is 175.3 mm wide.
    150 mm vs 175.3 mm
  • 1 more speakers
    This tablet has more speakers than the average tablet (3 vs 2). The average tablet has 2 speakers.
    3 vs 2
  • 6 fewer CPU threads
    This tablet has fewer CPU threads than the average tablet (2 vs 8). The average tablet has 8 CPU threads.
    2 vs 8
  • 31.4% lower review score
    Reviews score
    4.8/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.4 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 95% of models

    4.8

    Mark 7.2 is below the typical mark 7.8 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.0

    Average grade

    20%

    8.1

    Popularity

    Grades by review (15)
    9 reviews: 5 with a printed score, 4 estimated from the review. 6 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    4.8 vs 7.0
  • No USB-C port
    This tablet does not have a USB Type-C port, while the average tablet does. 54% of tablets have one.
  • 3 GB less RAM
    This tablet has less RAM than the average tablet (1 GB vs 4 GB). The average tablet has 4 GB of RAM.
    1 GB vs 4 GB
  • 50% lower CPU speed
    This tablet has a lower CPU speed than the average tablet (1 GHz vs 2 GHz). The average tablet has CPU speed of 2 GHz.
    1 GHz vs 2 GHz
  • More basic graphics
    This tablet has less advanced graphics than the average tablet (ULP GeForce vs Mali-G51).
    ULP GeForce vs Mali-G51
  • Shorter update support
    This tablet offers shorter update support than the average tablet (short vs medium). The average tablet gets medium of update support.
    short vs medium
  • No fast charging
    This tablet does not support fast charging, while the average tablet does. 56.8% of tablets support fast charging.
  • 31.4% lower review score
    Reviews score
    4.8/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.4 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 95% of models

    4.8

    Mark 7.2 is below the typical mark 7.8 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.0

    Average grade

    20%

    8.1

    Popularity

    Grades by review (15)
    9 reviews: 5 with a printed score, 4 estimated from the review. 6 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    4.8 vs 7.0
  • 23.5% worse value for money
    LG Optimus Pad WiFi (1GB + 32GB) has worse value for money than the average tablet (6.11 vs 7.6).
    6.11 vs 7.55
  • 2.69x more expensive
    LG Optimus Pad WiFi (1GB + 32GB) is more expensive than the average tablet (£700 vs £260).
    £700 vs £260
  • 6 fewer CPU threads
    This tablet has fewer CPU threads than the average tablet (2 vs 8). The average tablet has 8 CPU threads.
    2 vs 8
  • 3 GB less RAM
    This tablet has less RAM than the average tablet (1 GB vs 4 GB). The average tablet has 4 GB of RAM.
    1 GB vs 4 GB
  • 50% lower CPU speed
    This tablet has a lower CPU speed than the average tablet (1 GHz vs 2 GHz). The average tablet has CPU speed of 2 GHz.
    1 GHz vs 2 GHz
  • More basic graphics
    This tablet has less advanced graphics than the average tablet (ULP GeForce vs Mali-G51).
    ULP GeForce vs Mali-G51
  • 2.86x larger process node
    This tablet has a larger process node than the average tablet (40 nm vs 14 nm). The average tablet is built on 14 nm.
    40 nm vs 14 nm
  • 1,533 MHz slower RAM speed
    This tablet has a lower RAM speed than the average tablet (333 MHz vs 1,866 MHz). The average tablet has RAM speed of 1,866 MHz.
    333 MHz vs 1,866 MHz
  • 82.1% less memory bandwidth
    This tablet has less memory bandwidth than the average tablet (2.7 GB/s vs 14.9 GB/s). The average tablet has 14.9 GB/s of memory bandwidth.
    2.66 GB/s vs 14.9 GB/s
  • No big.LITTLE architecture
    This tablet does not support big.LITTLE architecture, while the average tablet does. 51.7% of tablets support big.LITTLE architecture.
  • 59.1% slower GPU clock
    This tablet runs its GPU slower than the average tablet (266 MHz vs 650 MHz). The average tablet runs its GPU at 650 MHz.
    266 MHz vs 650 MHz
  • 50% less internal storage
    This tablet has less internal storage than the average tablet (32 GB vs 64 GB). The average tablet has 64 GB of internal storage.
    32 GB vs 64 GB
  • 8 years older
    This tablet was released earlier than the average tablet (2011 vs 2019). The average tablet was released in 2019.
    2011 vs 2019
  • More basic memory type
    This tablet uses less advanced memory than the average tablet (LPDDR2 vs LPDDR3).
    LPDDR2 vs LPDDR3
  • Less sharp display
    This tablet has a less sharp screen than the average tablet (1280×768 vs 1920×1200).
    1,280×768 vs 1,920×1,200
  • Less durable glass
    This tablet has less durable glass than the average tablet (Tempered Glass vs Corning Gorilla Glass). The average tablet uses Corning Gorilla Glass.
    Tempered Glass vs Corning Gorilla Glass
  • 24% softer screen detail
    This tablet has softer screen detail than the average tablet (168 ppi vs 221 ppi). The average tablet has a pixel density of 221 ppi.
    168 ppi vs 221 ppi
  • Less vivid contrast
    This tablet has less contrast than the average tablet (811:1 vs 1015:1). The average tablet has a contrast ratio of 1015:1.
    811:1 vs 1,015:1
  • 1.2 inches smaller screen
    This tablet has a smaller screen than the average tablet (8.9 inches vs 10.1 inches). The average tablet measures 10.1 inches.
    8.9 inches vs 10.1 inches
  • 12 nits dimmer screen
    This tablet is dimmer than the average tablet (389 nits vs 401 nits). The average tablet reaches 401 nits.
    389 nits vs 401 nits
  • 19 nits lower typical brightness
    This tablet has a lower typical brightness than the average tablet (381 nits vs 400 nits). The average tablet reaches 400 nits typical brightness.
    381 nits vs 400 nits
  • 3 MP lower front resolution
    This tablet has a lower-resolution front camera than the average tablet (2 MP vs 5 MP). The average tablet has a front camera of 5 MP.
    2 MP vs 5 MP
  • No continuous video AF
    This tablet does not support continuous video AF, the average tablet does. 57.7% of tablets support continuous video autofocus.
  • 3 MP lower rear resolution
    This tablet has a lower-resolution rear camera than the average tablet (5 MP vs 8 MP). The average tablet has a rear camera of 8 MP.
    5 MP vs 8 MP
  • No HDR photo mode
    This tablet does not have HDR photo mode, the average tablet does. 79.8% of tablets support HDR photo mode.
  • Worse main-camera video
    This tablet supports worse main-camera video recording than the average tablet (1080x24 fps vs 1080x30 fps). The average tablet supports 1080x30 fps main-camera video recording.
    1080x24 fps vs 1080x30 fps
  • No backside-illuminated sensor
    This tablet does not have a BSI sensor, while the average tablet does. 52.6% of tablets have a BSI sensor.
  • No fast charging
    This tablet does not support fast charging, while the average tablet does. 56.8% of tablets support fast charging.
  • 44.4% slower charging
    This tablet charges slower than the average tablet (10 W vs 18 W). The average tablet charges at 18 W.
    10 W vs 18 W
  • 0.3 hours shorter battery life
    This tablet offers shorter battery life than the average tablet (9.7 hours vs 10 hours). The average tablet offers 10 hours of battery life.
    9.7 hours vs 10 hours
  • No USB-C port
    This tablet does not have a USB Type-C port, while the average tablet does. 54% of tablets have one.
  • Older Bluetooth version
    This tablet has an older Bluetooth version than the average tablet (2.1 vs 5).
    2.1 vs 5
  • Older Wi-Fi standard
    This tablet has an older Wi-Fi standard than the average tablet (Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)).
    Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)
  • Shorter update support
    This tablet offers shorter update support than the average tablet (short vs medium). The average tablet gets medium of update support.
    short vs medium
  • No direct OS updates
    This tablet does not support direct OS updates, while the average tablet does. 79.7% of tablets offer this.
  • No split-screen
    This tablet does not support split-screen, the average tablet does. 72.8% of tablets support split-screen.
  • No picture-in-picture mode
    This tablet does not support picture-in-picture, the average tablet does. 61.4% of tablets support picture-in-picture.
  • No camera and mic privacy
    This tablet does not support camera and mic privacy, while the average tablet does. 56.6% of tablets offer this.
  • No multi-user mode
    User score
    6.1/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average of independent expert reviews and videos, graded by us; missing reviews count as 7/10.
    When it matters
    When you want to know how independent test sites and video reviewers rate the product in real use.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    LG Optimus Pad WiFi
    the average tablet
    LG Optimus Pad WiFi (1GB + 32GB) does not support multi-user mode, while the average tablet does. 73.8% of tablets offer this.
  • No full-page screenshots
    This tablet does not support full-page screenshots, the average tablet does. 53% of tablets support full-page screenshots.
  • No location privacy
    This tablet does not support location privacy, while the average tablet does. 76.7% of tablets offer this.
  • No dark mode
    This tablet does not support dark mode, while the average tablet does. 57.7% of tablets offer this.
  • No offline voice recognition
    This tablet does not support offline voice recognition, the average tablet does. 76.4% of tablets support offline voice recognition.
  • 4.8 mm thicker
    This tablet is thicker than the average tablet (12.8 mm vs 8 mm). The average tablet is 8 mm thick.
    12.8 mm vs 8 mm

Video reviews

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

4.0
Tablet-News.com
≈ estimated
04/08/2011
Hands-on review · camera, apps, calls and 3D
Verdict
LG Optimus Pad WiFi is not convincing on 3D, and as an average tablet, it did not impress overall.
5.0
PhoneArena
≈ estimated
10/06/2011
Full review · build, screen, 3D and benchmark tests
Verdict
LG Optimus Pad WiFi works fine, but it is thick, heavy and too expensive for what it offers.
7.0
mobileburn
≈ estimated
18/04/2011
Hands-on review · apps, camera and 3D tests
Verdict
LG Optimus Pad WiFi is pleasant overall, with solid email and magazine apps, but video chat is broken.
8.0
mobileburn
≈ estimated
18/04/2011
Hands-on review · apps, camera, 3D and TV tests
Verdict
LG Optimus Pad WiFi is a strong Honeycomb tablet with a good display and build, though the app market and video chat have problems.
5.0
Stuff
≈ estimated
04/07/2011
Short review · features, performance and value
Verdict
LG Optimus Pad WiFi is good but unremarkable, and not enough to justify its price.
5.0
Steve “Chippy” Paine
≈ estimated
16/06/2011
First look · price and design impressions
Verdict
LG Optimus Pad WiFi is gimmicky at this price, though it could be worth considering if it gets cheaper.
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

6.0
techradar.com
✓ explicit
19/04/2011
Full review · 3D Honeycomb tablet
Verdict
The LG Optimus Pad runs Android 3.0 quickly and records 3D video, but its heavy plastic body and very high price hold it back.
8.6
notebookcheck.net
✓ explicit
24/08/2011
Detailed review · 3D tablet
Verdict
The LG Optimus Pad has an IPS screen and fun 3D recording, but weak photos, slow USB transfers and no 3D glasses in the box hold it back.
9.0
techspot.com
≈ estimated
19/04/2011
In-depth review · 3D tablet
Verdict
The T-Mobile G-Slate is a comfortable, well-built 8.9-inch tablet that runs 3D games smoothly, but few Android apps are built for tablets and the contract price is high.
6.0
expertreviews.co.uk
✓ explicit
05/08/2011
Full review · 3D tablet
Verdict
The LG Optimus Pad is light for its size and its dual cameras are unique, but the 3D output disappoints and the price is hard to justify.
6.0
pocket-lint.com
✓ explicit
16/04/2011
Full review · 3D Honeycomb tablet
Verdict
The LG Optimus Pad is fast and sharp with fun 3D recording, but its heavy plastic body and high price make it hard to recommend.
5.0
alphr.com
≈ estimated
17/08/2011
Full review · 3D tablet
Verdict
The LG Optimus Pad is well built, with a good 5MP camera and fast performance, but weak 3D features and a high price hold it back.
6.0
gizmodo.com
≈ estimated
14/02/2011
Hands-on test · 3D Honeycomb tablet
Verdict
The LG G-Slate has a great 8.9-inch size and decent build, but its phone-like Honeycomb software, underwhelming screen and crashes leave it feeling flat.
8.0
android-user.de
✓ explicit
08.02.2024*
Hands-on review · Stereo camera tablet
Verdict
The LG Optimus Pad is a solid Honeycomb tablet whose 3D camera is its main draw, but the high price and missing glasses count against it.
6.0
dday.it
≈ estimated
05/07/2011
Hands-on review · 3D recording tablet
Verdict
The LG Optimus Pad is an 8.9-inch Honeycomb tablet that records 3D, but its weak 3D footage and high price make it hard to recommend.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about LG Optimus Pad WiFi (1GB + 32GB)

  • High-resolution 8.9-inch display with crisp text and bright colors
  • Dual-core Nvidia Tegra 2 processor provides generally smooth performance
  • Wide 15:9 aspect ratio is well-suited for watching HD movies
  • Solid build quality with a comfortable soft-touch back for better grip
  • Innovative 3D video recording capabilities with dual 5-megapixel cameras
  • Generous 32GB of built-in internal storage

What customers don't like about LG Optimus Pad WiFi (1GB + 32GB)

  • Extremely high initial launch price compared to competitors like the iPad
  • Noticeably thick and heavy design that can tire the user's hand
  • Screen is highly reflective and difficult to read in direct sunlight
  • Lack of a microSD card slot for expandable storage
  • The 3D functionality is often viewed as a gimmick with limited practical use
  • Limited selection of tablet-optimized applications available on Android 3.0

Verdict

The LG Optimus Pad WiFi is an 8.9-inch Android 3.0 (Honeycomb) tablet powered by a 1GHz dual-core Nvidia Tegra 2 processor with 1GB of RAM and 32GB of internal storage. Its primary characteristic is a unique stereoscopic dual 5MP rear camera setup capable of recording 3D video, complemented by a 2MP front-facing camera and a high-resolution 1280x768 IPS display. Key pros include its comfortable 15:9 aspect ratio designed for one-handed grip, 1080p Full HD 2D video recording, and a long-lasting 6400mAh battery. However, notable cons include the lack of a microSD slot for expandable storage, the requirement of specialized glasses to view 3D content on its non-3D screen, and a relatively heavy, thick plastic build compared to its contemporaries.

Compare LG Optimus Pad WiFi (1GB + 32GB) 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 Optimus Pad WiFi (1GB + 32GB) and other tablets

No results found