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

Razer Edge Pro 2013 (8GB + 128GB) review: 168 specs compared

Avg. price:~£1,080RAM capacity:8 GBInternal storage:128 GBScreen size:10.1 inchesChipset:Intel Core i7-3517U

Razer Edge Pro 2013 (8GB + 128GB) Review: Compare 168 technical specifications and 14 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Tablets category and whether it is worth buying.

Razer Edge Pro 2013 (8GB + 128GB)
6.6/10

Overall score

Score
6.6/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
Score components

35%

6.1

Technical score

30%

?

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

25%

6.1

Reviews score

10%

?

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

â–¼Worse than 65% 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components

70%

6.6

Overall score

30%

4.8

Price

â–¼Worse than 99%
6.1

Technical score

Technical score
6.1/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 51% of models
Score components

22%

7.0

Performance

20%

5.9

Display

16%

4.8

Camera

14%

7.1

Battery

12%

6.2

Connectivity

8%

6.4

Software

5%

4.5

Design

3%

6.1

Audio

â–²Better than 51%
6.1

Reviews score

Reviews score
6.1/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 66% of models

6.1

Mark 7.4 is below the typical mark 7.8 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.3

Average grade

20%

8.1

Popularity

Grades by review (14)
13 reviews: 9 with a printed score, 4 estimated from the review. 1 video review, 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.
â–¼Worse than 66%
?

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
  • razer-edge-pro-128gb-8gb-128gb-2013
  • razer-edge-pro-128gb-8gb-128gb-2013
  • razer-edge-pro-128gb-8gb-128gb-2013
  • razer-edge-pro-128gb-8gb-128gb-2013
  • razer-edge-pro-128gb-8gb-128gb-2013
razer-edge-pro-128gb-8gb-128gb-2013
razer-edge-pro-128gb-8gb-128gb-2013
razer-edge-pro-128gb-8gb-128gb-2013
razer-edge-pro-128gb-8gb-128gb-2013
razer-edge-pro-128gb-8gb-128gb-2013
Where to buy
    N/A~ £1,080
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 Razer Edge Pro 2013 (8GB + 128GB)

Based on 13 · 1

Reviewers praise gaming power, the controller and solid build, but nearly all find it heavy, thick and short on battery.
Praised
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of tablet Razer Edge Pro 2013 (8GB + 128GB)

Technical score
Technical score
6.1/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 51% of models
Score components:

22%

7.0

Performance

20%

5.9

Display

16%

4.8

Camera

14%

7.1

Battery

12%

6.2

Connectivity

8%

6.4

Software

5%

4.5

Design

3%

6.1

Audio

6.1
Reviews score
6.1
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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components:

70%

6.6

Overall score

30%

4.8

Price

6.1
RAM capacity
8 GB
Market range: <1 GB – >8 GB
This tablet has 8 GB of RAM, which is more than 72.1% of tablets and equal to 17.9% of tablets.
Process node
22 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >40 nm
This tablet is built on a 22 nm process, which is larger than 57.9% of tablets and equal to 7.2% of tablets.
Internal storage
128 GB
Market range: <16 GB – >256 GB
This tablet has 128 GB of internal storage, which is more than 56.2% of tablets and equal to 20% of tablets.
Geekbench 6 single-core score
482 points
Market range: <233 points – >2.3k points
This tablet scores 482 points in single-core tests, which is lower than 58.4% of tablets.
Chipset
Intel Core i7-3517U
This tablet runs on Intel Core i7-3517U, which is more advanced than 76.8% of tablets.
Show more
What reviewers say
Screen resolution
1366×768
This tablet has a 1366×768 screen, which is less sharp than 65.6% of tablets and equal to 2.4% of tablets.
Refresh rate
144 Hz
Market range: <60 Hz – >120 Hz
This tablet has a 144 Hz screen, which is smoother than 91.2% of tablets and equal to 7.4% of tablets.
Display type
IPS LCD
This tablet uses a IPS LCD display type. 17% of tablets use this display technology.
Pixel density
155 ppi
Market range: <149 ppi – >291 ppi
This tablet has a pixel density of 155 ppi, which is lower than 84.5% of tablets and equal to 1.9% of tablets.
Display glass type
Corning Gorilla Glass 6
This tablet protects its screen with Corning Gorilla Glass 6, which is more durable than 99.6% of tablets and the same as 0.1% 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
N/A
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
N/A
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
Battery capacity
5,600 mAh
Market range: <4k mAh – >10.1k mAh
This tablet has 5,600 mAh battery capacity, which is smaller than 60.5% of tablets.
Charging speed
65 W
Market range: <10 W – >45 W
This tablet charges at 65 W, which is faster than 91.5% of tablets and equal to 1.7% of tablets.
Battery life
10.6 hours
Market range: <7 hours – >16 hours
This tablet has a battery life of 10.6 hours, which is longer than that of 60.6% of tablets and equal to that of 0.1% of tablets.
video playback
Wireless charging
no
This tablet does not support wireless charging. 1.5% of tablets offer this.
Fast charging
yes
This tablet supports fast charging. 43.2% of tablets offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say
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
no
This tablet does not have built-in GPS. 82.9% of tablets offer this.
5G connectivity
?
NFC
no
This tablet does not include NFC. 10.8% of tablets offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say
Operating system
Windows
This tablet uses the Windows operating system, which is less advanced than the one used by 84.2%.
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
no
This tablet does not support app tracking protection. 28.4% of tablets offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say
IP rating
?
Weight
962 g
Market range: <315 g – >730 g
This tablet weighs 962 g, which is heavier than 97.3% of tablets.
Backlit keyboard
yes
This tablet supports a backlit keyboard. 90.4% of tablets support backlit keyboards.
Keyboard accessory
yes
This tablet supports a keyboard accessory. 15.8% of tablets support this option.
Pen latency
N/A
Show more
What reviewers say
Number of microphones
2
Market range: <1 – >3
This tablet has a microphone array of 2, which is more than 55.1% of tablets and equal to 32.7% of tablets.
aptX Adaptive
yes
This tablet supports aptX Adaptive. 93.2% 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
2
Market range: <2 – >4
This tablet includes 2 speakers, which is more than in 9.8% of tablets and equal to the number in 60.8% of tablets.
FM radio
no
This tablet does not include an FM radio. 19% of tablets offer this.
Show more

Razer Edge Pro 2013 (8GB + 128GB) vs the average tablet

246810TotalPerformanceDisplayCameraBatteryConnectivitySoftwareDesignAudio
  • 2.4x faster refresh rate
    This tablet has a faster refresh rate than the average tablet (144 Hz vs 60 Hz). The average tablet has a 60 Hz refresh rate.
    144 Hz vs 60 Hz
  • More advanced chipset
    This tablet has a more advanced chipset than the average tablet (Intel Core i7-3517U vs MediaTek MT8169A).
    Intel Core i7-3517U vs MediaTek MT8169A
  • 3.61x faster charging
    This tablet charges faster than the average tablet (65 W vs 18 W). The average tablet charges at 18 W.
    65 W vs 18 W
  • 50% higher CPU speed
    This tablet has a higher CPU speed than the average tablet (3 GHz vs 2 GHz). The average tablet has CPU speed of 2 GHz.
    3 GHz vs 2 GHz
  • 4 GB more RAM
    This tablet has more RAM than the average tablet (8 GB vs 4 GB). The average tablet has 4 GB of RAM.
    8 GB vs 4 GB
  • Supports DisplayPort over USB-C
    This tablet supports DisplayPort over USB-C, the average tablet does not. 21.3% of tablets support DisplayPort over USB-C.
  • Monitors battery health
    This tablet monitors battery health, while the average tablet does not. 36.7% of tablets monitor battery health.
  • More durable glass
    This tablet has more durable glass than the average tablet (Corning Gorilla Glass 6 vs Corning Gorilla Glass). The average tablet uses Corning Gorilla Glass.
    Corning Gorilla Glass 6 vs Corning Gorilla Glass
  • More advanced chipset
    This tablet has a more advanced chipset than the average tablet (Intel Core i7-3517U vs MediaTek MT8169A).
    Intel Core i7-3517U vs MediaTek MT8169A
  • 50% higher CPU speed
    This tablet has a higher CPU speed than the average tablet (3 GHz vs 2 GHz). The average tablet has CPU speed of 2 GHz.
    3 GHz vs 2 GHz
  • 4 GB more RAM
    This tablet has more RAM than the average tablet (8 GB vs 4 GB). The average tablet has 4 GB of RAM.
    8 GB vs 4 GB
  • More advanced graphics
    This tablet has more advanced graphics than the average tablet (NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M LE vs Mali-G51).
    NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M LE vs Mali-G51
  • Supports multithreading
    This tablet supports multithreading, while the average tablet does not. 9.9% of tablets support multithreading.
  • 2x more internal storage
    This tablet has more internal storage than the average tablet (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average tablet has 64 GB of internal storage.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • 71.8% more memory bandwidth
    This tablet has more memory bandwidth than the average tablet (25.6 GB/s vs 14.9 GB/s). The average tablet has 14.9 GB/s of memory bandwidth.
    25.6 GB/s vs 14.9 GB/s
  • More advanced memory type
    This tablet uses more advanced memory than the average tablet (DDR3 vs LPDDR3).
    DDR3 vs LPDDR3
  • 2.4x faster refresh rate
    This tablet has a faster refresh rate than the average tablet (144 Hz vs 60 Hz). The average tablet has a 60 Hz refresh rate.
    144 Hz vs 60 Hz
  • More durable glass
    This tablet has more durable glass than the average tablet (Corning Gorilla Glass 6 vs Corning Gorilla Glass). The average tablet uses Corning Gorilla Glass.
    Corning Gorilla Glass 6 vs Corning Gorilla Glass
  • Supports HDR10
    This tablet supports HDR10, while the average tablet does not. 21.7% of tablets support HDR10.
  • 3.61x faster charging
    This tablet charges faster than the average tablet (65 W vs 18 W). The average tablet charges at 18 W.
    65 W vs 18 W
  • Monitors battery health
    This tablet monitors battery health, while the average tablet does not. 36.7% of tablets monitor battery health.
  • 0.6 hours longer battery life
    This tablet offers longer battery life than the average tablet (10.6 hours vs 10 hours). The average tablet offers 10 hours of battery life.
    video playback
    10.6 hours vs 10 hours
  • Supports DisplayPort over USB-C
    This tablet supports DisplayPort over USB-C, the average tablet does not. 21.3% of tablets support DisplayPort over USB-C.
  • Faster USB ports
    This tablet has faster USB ports than the average tablet (USB 3.2 Gen 1 vs USB 2).
    USB 3.2 Gen 1 vs USB 2.0
  • Supports HDMI output
    This tablet supports HDMI output, while the average tablet does not. 49.8% of tablets offer this.
    via USB-C video-out adapter
  • Supports app offloading
    This tablet supports app offloading, while the average tablet does not. 26.3% of tablets offer this.
  • Supports dynamic themes
    This tablet supports dynamic themes, while the average tablet does not. 29.5% of tablets offer this.
  • Includes backlit keyboard
    This tablet has a backlit keyboard, the average tablet does not. 9.6% of tablets offer a backlit keyboard.
  • 1 more microphones
    This tablet has more microphones than the average tablet (2 vs 1). The average tablet's microphone count is 1.
    2 vs 1
  • Supports aptX Adaptive
    This tablet supports aptX Adaptive, while the average tablet does not. 6.8% of tablets offer this.
  • Supports aptX Low Latency
    This tablet supports aptX Low Latency, the average tablet does not. 2.6% of tablets support aptX Low Latency.
  • No USB-C port
    This tablet does not have a USB Type-C port, while the average tablet does. 54% of tablets have one.
  • 4 fewer CPU threads
    This tablet has fewer CPU threads than the average tablet (4 vs 8). The average tablet has 8 CPU threads.
    4 vs 8
  • 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
  • 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
  • Less advanced operating system
    This tablet runs on a less advanced operating system than the average tablet (Windows vs Android). Operating system choice shapes app support, updates, and ecosystem features.
    Windows vs Android
  • No direct OS updates
    This tablet does not support direct OS updates, while the average tablet does. 79.7% of tablets offer this.
  • No continuous video AF
    This tablet does not support continuous video AF, the average tablet does. 57.7% of tablets support continuous video autofocus.
  • 96.3% heavier
    This tablet is heavier than the average tablet (962 g vs 490 g). The average tablet weighs 490 g.
    962 g vs 490 g
  • 12.9% lower review score
    Reviews score
    6.1/ 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
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models

    6.1

    Mark 7.4 is below the typical mark 7.8 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.3

    Average grade

    20%

    8.1

    Popularity

    Grades by review (14)
    13 reviews: 9 with a printed score, 4 estimated from the review. 1 video review, 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.
    6.1 vs 7.0
  • 4.15x more expensive
    Razer Edge Pro 2013 (8GB + 128GB) is more expensive than the average tablet (£1,080 vs £260).
    £1,080 vs £260
  • 24.4% worse value for money
    Razer Edge Pro 2013 (8GB + 128GB) has worse value for money than the average tablet (6.07 vs 7.6).
    6.07 vs 7.55
  • 4 fewer CPU threads
    This tablet has fewer CPU threads than the average tablet (4 vs 8). The average tablet has 8 CPU threads.
    4 vs 8
  • Slower storage type
    This tablet uses mSATA storage, while the average tablet uses faster eMMC. Storage technology still varies widely across tablets.
    mSATA vs eMMC
  • 6 years older
    This tablet was released earlier than the average tablet (2013 vs 2019). The average tablet was released in 2019.
    March 2013
    2013 vs 2019
  • 57.1% larger process node
    This tablet has a larger process node than the average tablet (22 nm vs 14 nm). The average tablet is built on 14 nm.
    22 nm vs 14 nm
  • 23.1% slower GPU clock
    This tablet runs its GPU slower than the average tablet (500 MHz vs 650 MHz). The average tablet runs its GPU at 650 MHz.
    500 MHz vs 650 MHz
  • 33.9% lower single-core score
    This tablet has a lower single-core score than the average tablet (482 points vs 729 points). The average tablet scores 729 points in single-core tests.
    482 points vs 729 points
  • 266 MHz slower RAM speed
    This tablet has a lower RAM speed than the average tablet (1,600 MHz vs 1,866 MHz). The average tablet has RAM speed of 1,866 MHz.
    1,600 MHz vs 1,866 MHz
  • 29.9% softer screen detail
    This tablet has softer screen detail than the average tablet (155 ppi vs 221 ppi). The average tablet has a pixel density of 221 ppi.
    155 ppi vs 221 ppi
  • Less vivid contrast
    This tablet has less contrast than the average tablet (708:1 vs 1015:1). The average tablet has a contrast ratio of 1015:1.
    708:1 vs 1,015:1
  • 11 nits dimmer screen
    This tablet is dimmer than the average tablet (390 nits vs 401 nits). The average tablet reaches 401 nits.
    390 nits vs 401 nits
  • Less sharp display
    This tablet has a less sharp screen than the average tablet (1366×768 vs 1920×1200).
    1,366×768 vs 1,920×1,200
  • 10 nits lower typical brightness
    This tablet has a lower typical brightness than the average tablet (390 nits vs 400 nits). The average tablet reaches 400 nits typical brightness.
    390 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.
  • No tap-to-focus
    This tablet does not support touch autofocus, while the average tablet does. 83% of tablets support touch autofocus.
  • No manual white balance
    This tablet does not support manual white balance, while the average tablet does. 51.5% of tablets support manual white balance.
  • No burst mode
    This tablet does not support burst mode, the average tablet does. 60.6% of tablets support burst mode.
  • 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 timelapse video
    This tablet does not support timelapse video, while the average tablet does. 57.5% of tablets support timelapse video.
  • 15.2% smaller battery capacity
    This tablet has a smaller battery capacity than the average tablet (5,600 mAh vs 6,600 mAh). The average tablet offers 6,600 mAh of battery capacity.
    5,600 mAh vs 6,600 mAh
  • 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 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)
  • No GPS
    This tablet does not include GPS, while the average tablet does. 82.9% of tablets include GPS.
  • Older Bluetooth version
    This tablet has an older Bluetooth version than the average tablet (4 vs 5).
    4 vs 5
  • No face recognition
    This tablet does not have face recognition, the average tablet does. 56.4% of tablets support face recognition.
  • 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
  • Less advanced operating system
    This tablet runs on a less advanced operating system than the average tablet (Windows vs Android). Operating system choice shapes app support, updates, and ecosystem features.
    Windows vs Android
  • No direct OS updates
    This tablet does not support direct OS updates, while the average tablet does. 79.7% 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 dark mode
    This tablet does not support dark mode, while the average tablet does. 57.7% of tablets offer this.
  • 96.3% heavier
    This tablet is heavier than the average tablet (962 g vs 490 g). The average tablet weighs 490 g.
    962 g vs 490 g
  • 11.5 mm thicker
    This tablet is thicker than the average tablet (19.5 mm vs 8 mm). The average tablet is 8 mm thick.
    19.5 mm vs 8 mm
  • 103.2 mm wider
    This tablet is wider than the average tablet (278.5 mm vs 175.3 mm). The average tablet is 175.3 mm wide.
    278.5 mm vs 175.3 mm

Video reviews

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

7.0
Tong Zou
≈ estimated
20/11/2023
Hands-on gaming test · games, heat and noise
Verdict
Razer Edge Pro 2013 runs most Steam games well on low settings, but it is dated, hot, loud and pricey.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
28/03/2013
Hands-on test · Portable gaming
Verdict
The Razer Edge Pro is a powerful, fairly light way to play PC games on the go, though it runs warm and many games need a keyboard and mouse.
7.3
theverge.com
✓ explicit
28/03/2013
Video review · Gaming tablet
Verdict
The Razer Edge Pro is great fun for PC games on the couch, but it is heavy and needs peripherals for most titles.
7.0
techspot.com
≈ estimated
02/04/2013
Hands-on test · Windows gaming tablet
Verdict
The Razer Edge Pro runs recent games well at medium settings, but the heavy gamepad and short battery mean you'll play in short bursts.
8.0
uk.pcmag.com
✓ explicit
09/04/2013
Full review · Windows gaming tablet
Verdict
The Razer Edge Pro lets you play PC games anywhere, but it runs hot, gets noisy under load and needs costly accessories.
6.0
wired.com
✓ explicit
08/05/2013
Hands-on review · Gaming tablet
Verdict
The Razer Edge Pro is a powerful, fast gaming machine for PC fans, but its battery life of two to four hours and heavy build make it poor for travel.
6.0
stuff.tv
✓ explicit
14/06/2013
Real-life review · Gaming tablet
Verdict
The Razer Edge Pro is powerful enough for recent PC games, but weight and an hour of game time mean it's hard to justify over a gaming laptop.
8.0
legitreviews.com
≈ estimated
08/01/2013
Show floor hands-on · Gaming tablet
Verdict
The Razer Edge Pro played smoothly at a CES demo, but the weight of the gamepad means it's best rested on a lap or table.
7.0
laptopmag.com
✓ explicit
07/04/2013
Full review · Gaming tablet
Verdict
The Razer Edge Pro packs high-end gaming power into a chunky tablet, but its price, short battery and bulk are big obstacles.
8.0
pcworld.com
✓ explicit
28/03/2013
Benchmarked review · Gaming tablet
Verdict
The Razer Edge Pro delivers strong game performance in a portable tablet, but short battery life and a weak screen hold it back.
7.0
techradar.com
✓ explicit
10/04/2013
Full review · Windows gaming tablet
Verdict
The Razer Edge Pro plays AAA PC games surprisingly well and is fun to use, but it's too pricey and heavy to recommend strongly.
5.0
allthingsd.com
≈ estimated
28/03/2013
Hands-on review · Gaming tablet
Verdict
The Razer Edge Pro plays demanding PC games smoothly with the gamepad, but a battery that lasts about an hour of gaming makes it hard to recommend.
6.0
computerbild.de
≈ estimated
05/06/2013
First test · Gaming tablet
Verdict
The Razer Edge Pro is fast, well built and good for racing games, but weak graphics and a short battery make it a poor portable gaming machine.
7.3
pcgameshardware.de
✓ explicit
02/07/2013
Hardware test · Gaming tablet
Verdict
The Razer Edge Pro runs almost all PC games at low to medium detail, but its coarse screen, short battery and heavy body limit it.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Razer Edge Pro 2013 (8GB + 128GB)

  • Powerful hardware capable of running full PC games (Intel Core i7 and Nvidia graphics)
  • Innovative and versatile design with multiple accessory modes (gamepad, dock, tablet)
  • Responsive 10.1-inch IPS display with excellent viewing angles and vivid colors
  • High-quality build using premium materials like aluminum and high-grade plastics
  • Effective cooling system that prevents the device from overheating despite high performance

What customers don't like about Razer Edge Pro 2013 (8GB + 128GB)

  • Extremely poor battery life, often lasting only 1 to 1.5 hours during intensive gaming
  • High total cost when including necessary proprietary accessories like the gamepad and dock
  • Bulky and heavy for a tablet, weighing over 2 pounds standalone and nearly 4 pounds with the gamepad
  • Screen resolution limited to 1366x768 rather than full 1080p HD
  • Lacks essential connectivity options like an SD card slot and Ethernet port without the dock
  • Mushy or less precise buttons and loose analog sticks on the gamepad accessory

Verdict

The Razer Edge Pro (2013) is a high-performance Windows 8 tablet featuring a 10.1-inch IPS touchscreen (1366x768 resolution), an Intel Core i7-3537U processor, 8GB of DDR3 RAM, and a dedicated NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M LE GPU with 2GB of VRAM. Key characteristics include its 128GB SSD storage and a highly versatile modular design that supports unique gaming accessories like a dual-analog gamepad controller and a desktop docking station. Its main pros are the ability to run full PC games natively in a portable form factor and its robust build quality. However, it suffers from significant cons, including a very short battery life of approximately one hour during intensive gaming, a bulky and heavy chassis (2.1 lbs), and a high price point for both the tablet and its required proprietary accessories.

Compare Razer Edge Pro 2013 (8GB + 128GB) with other tablets

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

Graphic comparison of Razer Edge Pro 2013 (8GB + 128GB) and other tablets

No results found