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

TCL NXTPAPER 10s WiFi (4GB + 64GB) review: 168 specs compared

Avg. price:~£220RAM capacity:4 GBInternal storage:64 GBScreen size:10.1 inchesChipset:MediaTek MT8768

TCL NXTPAPER 10s WiFi (4GB + 64GB) Review: Compare 168 technical specifications and 18 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Tablets category and whether it is worth buying.

TCL NXTPAPER 10s WiFi (4GB + 64GB)
6.7/10

Overall score

Score
6.7/ 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 63% of models
Score components

35%

6.2

Technical score

30%

?

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

25%

6.2

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 63% of tablets
7.5

Value for money

Value for money
7.5/ 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 57% of models
Score components

70%

6.7

Overall score

30%

9.4

Price

â–¼Worse than 57%
6.2

Technical score

Technical score
6.2/ 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 53% of models
Score components

22%

6.0

Performance

20%

4.7

Display

16%

7.3

Camera

14%

6.0

Battery

12%

6.7

Connectivity

8%

7.8

Software

5%

6.6

Design

3%

5.7

Audio

â–²Better than 53%
6.2

Reviews score

Reviews score
6.2/ 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 65% of models

6.2

Mark 7.5 is below the typical mark 7.8 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.4

Average grade

20%

8.3

Popularity

Grades by review (18)
13 reviews: 7 with a printed score, 6 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 65%
?

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
  • tcl-nxtpaper-10s-4gb-64gb-wifi
  • tcl-nxtpaper-10s-4gb-64gb-wifi
  • tcl-nxtpaper-10s-4gb-64gb-wifi
  • tcl-nxtpaper-10s-4gb-64gb-wifi
  • tcl-nxtpaper-10s-4gb-64gb-wifi
  • tcl-nxtpaper-10s-4gb-64gb-wifi
  • tcl-nxtpaper-10s-4gb-64gb-wifi
  • tcl-nxtpaper-10s-4gb-64gb-wifi
tcl-nxtpaper-10s-4gb-64gb-wifi
tcl-nxtpaper-10s-4gb-64gb-wifi
tcl-nxtpaper-10s-4gb-64gb-wifi
tcl-nxtpaper-10s-4gb-64gb-wifi
tcl-nxtpaper-10s-4gb-64gb-wifi
tcl-nxtpaper-10s-4gb-64gb-wifi
tcl-nxtpaper-10s-4gb-64gb-wifi
tcl-nxtpaper-10s-4gb-64gb-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 TCL NXTPAPER 10s WiFi (4GB + 64GB)

Based on 13 · 5

Reviewers love the glare-free matte screen for reading, but find performance sluggish, storage tight and brightness too low.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of tablet TCL NXTPAPER 10s WiFi (4GB + 64GB)

Technical score
Technical score
6.2/ 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 53% of models
Score components:

22%

6.0

Performance

20%

4.7

Display

16%

7.3

Camera

14%

6.0

Battery

12%

6.7

Connectivity

8%

7.8

Software

5%

6.6

Design

3%

5.7

Audio

6.2
Reviews score
6.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.5/ 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 57% of models
Score components:

70%

6.7

Overall score

30%

9.4

Price

7.5
RAM capacity
4 GB
Market range: <1 GB – >8 GB
This tablet has 4 GB of RAM, which is more than 47.2% of tablets and equal to 17.8% of tablets.
Process node
12 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >40 nm
This tablet is built on a 12 nm process, which is smaller than 53.2% of tablets and equal to 13.9% 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
MediaTek MT8768
This tablet runs on MediaTek MT8768, which is less advanced than 85.5% of tablets and equal to 1% of tablets.
Show more
What reviewers say
Screen resolution
1920×1200
This tablet has a 1920×1200 screen, which is sharper than 39.1% of tablets and equal to 18.8% 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
224 ppi
Market range: <149 ppi – >291 ppi
This tablet has a pixel density of 224 ppi, which is higher than 50.1% of tablets and equal to 11.5% of tablets.
Display glass type
Plastic
This tablet protects its screen with Plastic, which is less durable than 97.7% of tablets and the same as 2.3% 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
8 MP
Market range: <3.15 MP – >13 MP
This tablet has a rear camera with 8 MP resolution, which is higher than 36.4% of tablets and equal to 31.9% of tablets.
Front camera megapixels
5 MP
Market range: <1.2 MP – >9 MP
This tablet has a front camera with 5 MP resolution, which is higher than 48.6% of tablets and equal to 19.7% of tablets.
Main camera aperture
f/2.0
This tablet has a main camera aperture of f/2.0, which is wider than 57.4% of tablets and equal to 24.7% of tablets.
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
8,000 mAh
Market range: <4k mAh – >10.1k mAh
This tablet has 8,000 mAh battery capacity, which is larger than 70.2% of tablets and equal to 4% of tablets.
Charging speed
18 W
Market range: <10 W – >45 W
This tablet charges at 18 W, which is faster than 48% of tablets and equal to 12.3% 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.
mixed use
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
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
yes
This tablet supports direct OS updates. 20.3% of tablets offer this.
On-device AI
?
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
490 g
Market range: <315 g – >730 g
This tablet weighs 490 g, which is lighter than 49.3% of tablets and equal to 2.1% 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
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
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
yes
This tablet includes an FM radio. 81.1% of tablets offer this.
Show more

TCL NXTPAPER 10s WiFi (4GB + 64GB) vs the average tablet

246810TotalPerformanceDisplayCameraBatteryConnectivitySoftwareDesignAudio
  • Supports PDAF
    This tablet supports PDAF, the average tablet does not. 28% of tablets support PDAF.
  • Stylus included
    This tablet includes a stylus, while the average tablet does not. 17.2% of tablets offer this.
  • More vivid contrast
    This tablet has more contrast than the average tablet (1500:1 vs 1015:1). The average tablet has a contrast ratio of 1015:1.
    1,500:1 vs 1,015:1
  • 21.2% larger battery capacity
    This tablet has a larger battery capacity than the average tablet (8,000 mAh vs 6,600 mAh). The average tablet offers 6,600 mAh of battery capacity.
    8,000 mAh vs 6,600 mAh
  • More advanced memory type
    This tablet uses more advanced memory than the average tablet (LPDDR4X vs LPDDR3).
    LPDDR4X vs LPDDR3
  • 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
  • Wider main camera aperture
    This tablet has a wider main camera aperture than the average tablet (f/2 vs f/2.2). The average tablet's main camera aperture is f/2.2.
    f/2.0 vs f/2.2
  • Supports slow-motion video
    This tablet supports slow-motion recording, while the average tablet does not. 37.3% of tablets support slow-motion recording.
  • More advanced memory type
    This tablet uses more advanced memory than the average tablet (LPDDR4X vs LPDDR3).
    LPDDR4X vs LPDDR3
  • 14.3% smaller process node
    This tablet has a smaller process node than the average tablet (12 nm vs 14 nm). The average tablet is built on 14 nm.
    12 nm vs 14 nm
  • More vivid contrast
    This tablet has more contrast than the average tablet (1500:1 vs 1015:1). The average tablet has a contrast ratio of 1015:1.
    1,500:1 vs 1,015:1
  • Supports PDAF
    This tablet supports PDAF, the average tablet does not. 28% of tablets support PDAF.
  • Wider main camera aperture
    This tablet has a wider main camera aperture than the average tablet (f/2 vs f/2.2). The average tablet's main camera aperture is f/2.2.
    f/2.0 vs f/2.2
  • Supports slow-motion video
    This tablet supports slow-motion recording, while the average tablet does not. 37.3% of tablets support slow-motion recording.
  • Built-in camera flash
    This tablet has a camera flash, while the average tablet does not. 45.5% of tablets have one.
  • 21.2% larger battery capacity
    This tablet has a larger battery capacity than the average tablet (8,000 mAh vs 6,600 mAh). The average tablet offers 6,600 mAh of battery capacity.
    8,000 mAh vs 6,600 mAh
  • Includes clipboard warnings
    This tablet has clipboard warnings, the average tablet does not. 40.3% of tablets include clipboard warnings.
    paste warning
  • Stylus included
    This tablet includes a stylus, while the average tablet does not. 17.2% of tablets offer this.
  • 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
  • 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
  • 251 nits dimmer screen
    This tablet is dimmer than the average tablet (150 nits vs 401 nits). The average tablet reaches 401 nits.
    150 nits vs 401 nits
  • Less durable glass
    This tablet has less durable glass than the average tablet (Plastic vs Corning Gorilla Glass). The average tablet uses Corning Gorilla Glass.
    Plastic vs Corning Gorilla Glass
  • 229 nits lower typical brightness
    This tablet has a lower typical brightness than the average tablet (171 nits vs 400 nits). The average tablet reaches 400 nits typical brightness.
    171 nits vs 400 nits
  • No manual exposure control
    This tablet does not support manual exposure, while the average tablet does. 63.6% of tablets support manual exposure.
  • 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.
  • 11.4% lower review score
    Reviews score
    6.2/ 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 65% of models

    6.2

    Mark 7.5 is below the typical mark 7.8 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.4

    Average grade

    20%

    8.3

    Popularity

    Grades by review (18)
    13 reviews: 7 with a printed score, 6 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.
    6.2 vs 7.0
  • More basic graphics
    This tablet has less advanced graphics than the average tablet (PowerVR GE8320 vs Mali-G51).
    PowerVR GE8320 vs Mali-G51
  • 11.4% lower review score
    Reviews score
    6.2/ 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 65% of models

    6.2

    Mark 7.5 is below the typical mark 7.8 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.4

    Average grade

    20%

    8.3

    Popularity

    Grades by review (18)
    13 reviews: 7 with a printed score, 6 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.
    6.2 vs 7.0
  • More basic graphics
    This tablet has less advanced graphics than the average tablet (PowerVR GE8320 vs Mali-G51).
    PowerVR GE8320 vs Mali-G51
  • 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
  • 2 fewer GPU execution units
    This tablet has less GPU execution units than the average tablet (2 vs 4). The average tablet has 4 GPU execution units.
    2 vs 4
  • 251 nits dimmer screen
    This tablet is dimmer than the average tablet (150 nits vs 401 nits). The average tablet reaches 401 nits.
    150 nits vs 401 nits
  • Less durable glass
    This tablet has less durable glass than the average tablet (Plastic vs Corning Gorilla Glass). The average tablet uses Corning Gorilla Glass.
    Plastic vs Corning Gorilla Glass
  • 229 nits lower typical brightness
    This tablet has a lower typical brightness than the average tablet (171 nits vs 400 nits). The average tablet reaches 400 nits typical brightness.
    171 nits vs 400 nits
  • No manual exposure control
    This tablet does not support manual exposure, while the average tablet does. 63.6% of tablets support manual exposure.
  • 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 Ethernet support
    This tablet does not have Ethernet support, the average tablet does. 76.5% of tablets support Ethernet.
  • 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 camera and mic privacy
    This tablet does not support camera and mic privacy, while the average tablet does. 56.6% of tablets offer this.
  • 41.3 mm taller
    This tablet is taller than the average tablet (241.3 mm vs 200 mm). The average tablet is 200 mm tall.
    241.3 mm vs 200 mm

Video reviews

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

7.0
HardReset.Info
≈ estimated
12/12/2022
Unboxing · first look and details
Verdict
TCL NXTPAPER 10s WiFi does the job for its price, though it is not the fastest and its paper feel depends on the protective film.
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

4.0
tomsguide.com
✓ explicit
17/11/2022
Lab test · Paper-like display
Verdict
The TCL NXTPAPER 10s has a pleasant pen-on-paper feel, but its dim, fuzzy screen and budget processor make it weak as an all-round tablet.
7.0
techradar.com
✓ explicit
08/03/2023
Hands-on review · Eye-care tablet
Verdict
The TCL NXTPAPER 10s suits students and parents who want an eye-friendly tablet for schoolwork, but its soft picture is weak for streaming video.
5.5
reviews.org
✓ explicit
29/03/2023
Hands-on review · Ereader hybrid
Verdict
The TCL NXTPAPER 10s tries to be a tablet, ereader and laptop at once but does none of them well, so two separate devices serve you better.
6.0
choice.com.au
≈ estimated
23/01/2023
Lab test · Reading-first tablet
Verdict
The TCL NXTPAPER 10s is a jack-of-all-trades for reading and web browsing, but its dim screen and PC Mode glitch hold it back.
6.8
gadgetguy.com.au
✓ explicit
23/01/2023
Hands-on review · Paper-like tablet
Verdict
The TCL NXTPAPER 10s may ease eye strain, but its dim, washed-out screen makes it frustrating for almost any task.
8.0
techguide.com.au
✓ explicit
11/10/2022
Hands-on review · Eye-friendly screen
Verdict
The TCL NXTPAPER 10s is a paper-like tablet that's easy on the eyes, making it a good pick for a child who needs eye protection.
7.0
bttr.reviews
≈ estimated
13/02/2023
Review · Matte screen for kids
Verdict
The TCL NXTPAPER 10s is a reasonable choice for kids or light daily use if its matte screen appeals, though switching between apps causes pauses.
8.0
idboox.com
≈ estimated
19/05/2022
Video review · Ereader alternative
Verdict
The TCL NXTPAPER 10s is an interesting ereader alternative for comics and children's books, but poor contrast in sunlight and its weight hold it back.
7.7
computerhoy.20minutos.es
✓ explicit
16/05/2022
Hands-on review · Reading-focused tablet
Verdict
The TCL NXTPAPER 10s is a good reader for undemanding users, but its dim, slightly soft screen and weak processor limit video and games.
9.3
planetared.com
✓ explicit
08/09/2023
Review · Matte reading screen
Verdict
The TCL NXTPAPER 10s is an easy-on-the-eyes reading and writing tablet, but its slow processor, weak cameras and old Android 11 limit it.
6.0
businessinsider.es
≈ estimated
25/06/2022
Review · Layered reading screen
Verdict
The TCL NXTPAPER 10s is a comfortable, e-reader-style tablet for reading and light web use, but it's too weak for demanding games and many open apps.
7.0
tg24.sky.it
≈ estimated
21/07/2022
Hands-on review · Reading-first tablet
Verdict
The TCL NXTPAPER 10s is ideal for reading, note-taking and student use, but its dim screen makes it unsuited to video and games.
7.0
it.mashable.com
≈ estimated
27/04/2022
Hands-on test · Pen-on-paper feel
Verdict
The TCL NXTPAPER 10s suits reading, note-taking and drawing for adults and children, but it is not the pick for games or HDR films.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about TCL NXTPAPER 10s WiFi (4GB + 64GB)

  • Innovative matte screen technology that significantly reduces glare and eye strain
  • Effective blue light reduction (up to 73%) with TUV certification
  • Includes useful accessories like the T-Pen and a detachable keyboard case in many regions
  • Large 8,000mAh battery provides a full day of typical use for school or work
  • Affordable price point compared to premium tablets with similar paper-like screen features
  • Textured screen surface offers a more natural, resistant feel for writing and sketching

What customers don't like about TCL NXTPAPER 10s WiFi (4GB + 64GB)

  • The screen is quite dim even at maximum brightness, leading to poor outdoor visibility
  • Matte finish causes the display to look slightly fuzzy or 'soft' compared to high-resolution glossy screens
  • Middle-of-the-road performance with occasional juddering during scrolling or switching between heavy apps
  • Cameras are basic and can produce hazy or overexposed images
  • Heavier and bulkier than dedicated e-readers, making one-handed reading less comfortable
  • Software settings for the specialized display modes can be confusing and slow to switch

Verdict

The TCL NXTPAPER 10s WiFi (4GB + 64GB) is a 10.1-inch Android 11 tablet specifically designed for eye comfort, featuring a 1920 x 1200 FHD IPS display with a unique multi-layered 'paper-like' matte finish that reduces blue light by over 73%. Powered by a MediaTek MT8768 octa-core processor, it includes 4GB of RAM and 64GB of storage (expandable via microSD up to 256GB), alongside an 8,000mAh battery supporting 18W fast charging. Main pros include its highly effective anti-glare screen that minimizes eye strain, an impressive battery life of up to 8 hours for mixed-use, and decent multitasking capabilities for educational or basic productivity tasks. However, its specialized display suffers from a noticeably dim and 'fuzzy' image quality with lower contrast compared to standard tablets, the entry-level chipset struggles with high-end gaming, and the camera performance is relatively poor in low-light conditions.

Compare TCL NXTPAPER 10s WiFi (4GB + 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 TCL NXTPAPER 10s WiFi (4GB + 64GB) and other tablets

No results found