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

Samsung ATIV Tab 3 WiFi (2GB + 64GB) review: 168 specs compared

Avg. price:~£260RAM capacity:2 GBInternal storage:64 GBScreen size:10.1 inchesChipset:Intel Atom Z2760

Samsung ATIV Tab 3 WiFi (2GB + 64GB) 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.

6.2/10

Overall score

Score
6.2/ 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 81% of models
Score components

35%

5.4

Technical score

30%

?

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

25%

5.4

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 81% of tablets
7.1

Value for money

Value for money
7.1/ 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 78% of models
Score components

70%

6.2

Overall score

30%

9.2

Price

â–¼Worse than 78%
5.4

Technical score

Technical score
5.4/ 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–¼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components

22%

4.8

Performance

20%

4.8

Display

16%

5.4

Camera

14%

5.6

Battery

12%

5.8

Connectivity

8%

6.5

Software

5%

7.1

Design

3%

5.5

Audio

â–¼Worse than 75%
5.4

Reviews score

Reviews score
5.4/ 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 81% of models

5.4

Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.8 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.1

Average grade

20%

8.1

Popularity

Grades by review (14)
9 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 5 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.
â–¼Worse than 81%
?

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
  • No image
No image
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.
Available versions:
2GB + 64GB
Other versions:
2GB + 128GB

What reviewers say about the Samsung ATIV Tab 3 WiFi (2GB + 64GB)

Based on 9 · 5

Reviewers like the S Pen and software, but most find performance sluggish and the build quality underwhelming.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of tablet Samsung ATIV Tab 3 WiFi (2GB + 64GB)

Technical score
Technical score
5.4/ 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–¼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components:

22%

4.8

Performance

20%

4.8

Display

16%

5.4

Camera

14%

5.6

Battery

12%

5.8

Connectivity

8%

6.5

Software

5%

7.1

Design

3%

5.5

Audio

5.4
Reviews score
5.4
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.1/ 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 78% of models
Score components:

70%

6.2

Overall score

30%

9.2

Price

7.1
RAM capacity
2 GB
Market range: <1 GB – >8 GB
This tablet has 2 GB of RAM, which is less than 61.3% of tablets and equal to 15.5% of tablets.
Process node
32 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >40 nm
This tablet is built on a 32 nm process, which is larger than 82.7% of tablets and equal to 4.2% of tablets.
Internal storage
64 GB
Market range: <16 GB – >256 GB
This tablet has 64 GB of internal storage, which is more than 39.1% of tablets and equal to 17% of tablets.
Geekbench 6 single-core score
?
Chipset
Intel Atom Z2760
This tablet runs on Intel Atom Z2760, which is less advanced than 81.9% of tablets and equal to 1.1% 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
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
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
This tablet protects its screen with Corning Gorilla Glass, which is more durable than 45.4% of tablets and the same as 32.8% 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
2 MP
Market range: <3.15 MP – >13 MP
This tablet has a rear camera with 2 MP resolution, which is lower than 93.6% of tablets and equal to 5.6% of tablets.
Front camera megapixels
0.9 MP
Market range: <1.2 MP – >9 MP
This tablet has a front camera with 0.9 MP resolution, which is lower than 92.7% of tablets and equal to 0.2% 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
3,610 mAh
Market range: <4k mAh – >10.1k mAh
This tablet has 3,610 mAh battery capacity, which is smaller than 91.8% of tablets and equal to 0.1% of tablets.
Charging speed
40 W
Market range: <10 W – >45 W
This tablet charges at 40 W, which is faster than 80.3% of tablets and equal to 2.2% of tablets.
Battery life
10 hours
Market range: <7 hours – >16 hours
This tablet has a battery life of 10 hours, which is longer than that of 39.1% of tablets and equal to that of 20.5% of tablets.
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
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
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
yes
This tablet supports direct OS updates. 20.3% 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
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
550 g
Market range: <315 g – >730 g
This tablet weighs 550 g, which is heavier than 64.9% of tablets and equal to 0.6% of tablets.
Backlit keyboard
no
This tablet does not support a backlit keyboard. 9.7% of tablets support backlit keyboards.
Keyboard accessory
yes
This tablet supports a keyboard accessory. 15.8% of tablets support this option.
Pen latency
?
Show more
What reviewers say
Number of microphones
?
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
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

Samsung ATIV Tab 3 WiFi (2GB + 64GB) vs the average tablet

246810TotalPerformanceDisplayCameraBatteryConnectivitySoftwareDesignAudio
  • 2.22x faster charging
    This tablet charges faster than the average tablet (40 W vs 18 W). The average tablet charges at 18 W.
    40 W vs 18 W
  • Stylus included
    This tablet includes a stylus, while the average tablet does not. 17.2% of tablets offer this.
  • Supports manual ISO
    This tablet supports manual ISO, while the average tablet does not. 45.9% of tablets support manual ISO.
  • Supports drawing
    This tablet is suitable for drawing, while the average tablet is not. 40% of tablets are suitable for drawing.
  • Supports multithreading
    This tablet supports multithreading, while the average tablet does not. 9.9% of tablets support multithreading.
  • 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 multithreading
    This tablet supports multithreading, while the average tablet does not. 9.9% of tablets support multithreading.
  • Supports manual ISO
    This tablet supports manual ISO, while the average tablet does not. 45.9% of tablets support manual ISO.
  • Built-in camera flash
    This tablet has a camera flash, while the average tablet does not. 45.5% of tablets have one.
  • 2.22x faster charging
    This tablet charges faster than the average tablet (40 W vs 18 W). The average tablet charges at 18 W.
    40 W vs 18 W
  • Supports HDMI output
    This tablet supports HDMI output, while the average tablet does not. 49.8% of tablets offer this.
  • Stylus included
    This tablet includes a stylus, while the average tablet does not. 17.2% of tablets offer this.
  • Supports drawing
    This tablet is suitable for drawing, while the average tablet is not. 40% of tablets are suitable for drawing.
  • 4.1 MP lower front resolution
    This tablet has a lower-resolution front camera than the average tablet (0.9 MP vs 5 MP). The average tablet has a front camera of 5 MP.
    0.9 MP vs 5 MP
  • 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
  • 6 MP lower rear resolution
    This tablet has a lower-resolution rear camera than the average tablet (2 MP vs 8 MP). The average tablet has a rear camera of 8 MP.
    2 MP vs 8 MP
  • 45.3% smaller battery capacity
    This tablet has a smaller battery capacity than the average tablet (3,610 mAh vs 6,600 mAh). The average tablet offers 6,600 mAh of battery capacity.
    3,610 mAh vs 6,600 mAh
  • 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
  • 22.9% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.4/ 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 81% of models

    5.4

    Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.8 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.1

    Average grade

    20%

    8.1

    Popularity

    Grades by review (14)
    9 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 5 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.
    5.4 vs 7.0
  • 22.9% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.4/ 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 81% of models

    5.4

    Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.8 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.1

    Average grade

    20%

    8.1

    Popularity

    Grades by review (14)
    9 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 5 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.
    5.4 vs 7.0
  • 6.8% worse value for money
    Samsung ATIV Tab 3 WiFi (2GB + 64GB) has worse value for money than the average tablet (7.07 vs 7.6).
    7.07 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
  • 2 GB less RAM
    This tablet has less RAM than the average tablet (2 GB vs 4 GB). The average tablet has 4 GB of RAM.
    2 GB vs 4 GB
  • 2.29x larger process node
    This tablet has a larger process node than the average tablet (32 nm vs 14 nm). The average tablet is built on 14 nm.
    32 nm vs 14 nm
  • 1,066 MHz slower RAM speed
    This tablet has a lower RAM speed than the average tablet (800 MHz vs 1,866 MHz). The average tablet has RAM speed of 1,866 MHz.
    800 MHz vs 1,866 MHz
  • More basic graphics
    This tablet has less advanced graphics than the average tablet (PowerVR SGX545 vs Mali-G51).
    PowerVR SGX545 vs Mali-G51
  • 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.
  • 57% less memory bandwidth
    This tablet has less memory bandwidth than the average tablet (6.4 GB/s vs 14.9 GB/s). The average tablet has 14.9 GB/s of memory bandwidth.
    6.4 GB/s vs 14.9 GB/s
  • 10% lower CPU speed
    This tablet has a lower CPU speed than the average tablet (1.8 GHz vs 2 GHz). The average tablet has CPU speed of 2 GHz.
    1.8 GHz vs 2 GHz
  • 6 years older
    This tablet was released earlier than the average tablet (2013 vs 2019). The average tablet was released in 2019.
    September 2013
    2013 vs 2019
  • More basic memory type
    This tablet uses less advanced memory than the average tablet (LPDDR2 vs LPDDR3).
    LPDDR2 vs LPDDR3
  • 18% slower GPU clock
    This tablet runs its GPU slower than the average tablet (533 MHz vs 650 MHz). The average tablet runs its GPU at 650 MHz.
    533 MHz vs 650 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 (345:1 vs 1015:1). The average tablet has a contrast ratio of 1015:1.
    345:1 vs 1,015:1
  • 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
  • 1 nits dimmer screen
    This tablet is dimmer than the average tablet (400 nits vs 401 nits). The average tablet reaches 401 nits.
    400 nits vs 401 nits
  • 4.1 MP lower front resolution
    This tablet has a lower-resolution front camera than the average tablet (0.9 MP vs 5 MP). The average tablet has a front camera of 5 MP.
    0.9 MP vs 5 MP
  • 6 MP lower rear resolution
    This tablet has a lower-resolution rear camera than the average tablet (2 MP vs 8 MP). The average tablet has a rear camera of 8 MP.
    2 MP vs 8 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.
  • Worse main-camera video
    This tablet supports worse main-camera video recording than the average tablet (720x30 fps vs 1080x30 fps). The average tablet supports 1080x30 fps main-camera video recording.
    720x30 fps vs 1080x30 fps
  • 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.
  • 45.3% smaller battery capacity
    This tablet has a smaller battery capacity than the average tablet (3,610 mAh vs 6,600 mAh). The average tablet offers 6,600 mAh of battery capacity.
    3,610 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)
  • Older Bluetooth version
    This tablet has an older Bluetooth version than the average tablet (4 vs 5).
    4 vs 5
  • 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 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 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.
  • No offline voice recognition
    This tablet does not support offline voice recognition, the average tablet does. 76.4% of tablets support offline voice recognition.
  • 12.2% heavier
    This tablet is heavier than the average tablet (550 g vs 490 g). The average tablet weighs 490 g.
    550 g vs 490 g

Video reviews

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

6.0
PhoneArena
≈ estimated
20/06/2013
Preview · early prototype hands-on · video and performance tests
Verdict
Samsung ATIV Tab 3 WiFi is good in its class, but it is unclear whether buyers need a jack-of-all-trades tablet like this.
4.0
Hands-On Tech
≈ estimated
08/01/2014
Hands-on review · display, battery and price
Verdict
Samsung ATIV Tab 3 WiFi is not worth buying at this price; it needs a lower price, a faster processor and better resolution.
8.0
Notebook Italia
≈ estimated
14/12/2013
Hands-on demo: Office apps, pen and ports
Verdict
Samsung ATIV Tab 3 WiFi is a tablet and PC in one device that works out cheaper than buying both separately.
6.0
Pocketnow
≈ estimated
21/06/2013
Hands-on review · thinness and performance check
Verdict
Samsung ATIV Tab 3 WiFi is very thin and light, but modest performance and 2 GB of RAM limit heavier use.
8.0
BASIC thinking
≈ estimated
20/06/2013
First look · hands-on impressions at a launch event
Verdict
Samsung ATIV Tab 3 WiFi stands out for its look and feel among Windows 8 tablets, so it is worth trying in a store.
Hands-on video, no verdict
Hands-on video, no verdict
Hands-on video, no verdict
Hands-on video, no verdict
Hands-on video, no verdict
Hands-on video, no verdict
Hands-on video, no verdict

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.0
trustedreviews.com
≈ estimated
20/06/2013
First impressions · Windows 8 tablet
Verdict
The Samsung ATIV Tab 3 is a light, 8.2mm Windows 8 tablet with a built-in S Pen, but its plastic body feels less sturdy and it is not the fastest.
7.0
techradar.com
≈ estimated
24/06/2013
Hands-on test · Windows 8 tablet
Verdict
The Samsung ATIV Tab 3 is a light, thin Windows 8 tablet with full desktop software and a useful stylus, though its plastic feels cheap and ports are limited.
6.0
ubergizmo.com
≈ estimated
20/06/2013
First hands-on · Windows 8 tablet
Verdict
The Samsung ATIV Tab 3 is a thin Windows 8 tablet that feels quick for its modest processor, but its plastic body and unimpressive screen let it down.
6.0
expertreviews.co.uk
≈ estimated
21/06/2013
Hands-on impressions · Windows tablet
Verdict
The Samsung ATIV Tab 3 is a thin, light Windows tablet with above-average viewing angles and a keyboard cover, though its plastic body and heavy-use performance remain unproven.
7.0
connect.de
≈ estimated
06/12/2013
Endurance test · Windows 8 bundle
Verdict
The Samsung ATIV Tab 3 is a comfortable Windows 8 tablet that lasts 8 hours 20 minutes, but its weak camera and mediocre screen hold it back.
8.1
notebookcheck.com
✓ explicit
13/11/2013
Lab test · Atom processor tablet
Verdict
The Samsung ATIV Tab 3 is silent and stays cool with wide viewing angles, but its Atom chip is too slow for heavy work like Outlook and large photo editing.
7.4
computerbild.de
✓ explicit
02/11/2013
Full test · Keyboard case tablet
Verdict
The Samsung ATIV Tab 3 is a fast Windows 8 tablet with a handy keyboard cover, but its dim screen and steep price weigh against it.
6.0
01net.com
✓ explicit
22/11/2013
Full review · Keyboard case tablet
Verdict
The Samsung ATIV Tab 3 is a long-lasting Windows 8 tablet with a good screen, but its weak processor makes it hard to recommend, even at its price.
7.5
fwd.nl
✓ explicit
08/10/2013
Hands-on review · Windows 8 tablet
Verdict
The Samsung ATIV Tab 3 is a solid Windows 8 tablet with a pleasant IPS screen and a useful S Pen, but its battery lasts about six hours and Spotify is missing.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Samsung ATIV Tab 3 WiFi (2GB + 64GB)

  • Extremely thin and lightweight design (approx. 550g), making it very portable.
  • Includes a functional S Pen stylus that slots directly into the device body.
  • Runs the full version of Windows 8, allowing for standard desktop application support.
  • Good connectivity options including micro HDMI, micro USB, and a microSD card slot.
  • Bundled with a high-quality Bluetooth keyboard case that offers a comfortable typing experience.

What customers don't like about Samsung ATIV Tab 3 WiFi (2GB + 64GB)

  • The 1366 x 768 display resolution is considered low and underwhelming for a 10.1-inch tablet.
  • Underpowered Intel Atom processor can lead to slow application loading and limited multitasking.
  • High initial launch price made it difficult to recommend against more powerful or higher-resolution competitors.
  • Plastic build quality feels less premium and sturdy compared to rival high-end tablets.
  • Cameras are generally poor, with low resolution and mediocre image quality.

Verdict

The Samsung ATIV Tab 3 (XE300TZC) is an ultra-slim 10.1-inch tablet featuring a 1366x768 IPS display and running a full version of Windows 8. It is powered by an Intel Atom Z2760 dual-core processor clocked at 1.8 GHz, paired with 2GB of RAM and 64GB of eMMC storage, which is expandable via microSD. Key characteristics include its remarkably thin 8.2mm profile, a lightweight 550g plastic chassis, and the integration of an S Pen stylus that slots directly into the body. Main pros highlight its high portability, inclusion of a full Microsoft Office Home & Student suite, and a respectable battery life of up to 10 hours. However, notable cons include underpowered performance for demanding tasks, a relatively low-resolution screen compared to period rivals, and a build quality that feels somewhat cheap due to the extensive use of plastic.

Compare Samsung ATIV Tab 3 WiFi (2GB + 64GB) with other tablets

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

Graphic comparison of Samsung ATIV Tab 3 WiFi (2GB + 64GB) and other tablets

No results found