Notebookcheck Logo

Cubot Tab 50 评测--配备 LTE 调制解调器和全高清屏幕的极速经济型平板电脑

动力强劲,储物空间大。

Tab 50 是一款经济实惠的平板电脑,配备快速 SoC,可通过 LTE 上网。它承诺了很多,但 Cubot 平板电脑是否真的适合所有潜在用户购买?
Android ARM Tablet
Cubot Tab 50 (TAB Series)
Processor
Mediatek Helio G99 8 x 2 - 2.2 GHz, Cortex-A76 / A55
Graphics adapter
Memory
8 GB 
Display
10.40 inch 5:3, 2000 x 1200 pixel 224 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, IPS, glossy: yes, 60 Hz
Storage
256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash, 256 GB 
, 200 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: 3.5mm audio port, Card Reader: microSD (shared, up to 1 TB), Brightness Sensor, Sensors: acceleration, gyroscope, magnetic
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 5.2, GSM, UMTS, 4G (B1/3/7/8/20), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.7 x 246.4 x 161.5
Battery
7500 mAh Lithium-Ion, 18 Watt charging
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 13
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix LED flash
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix
Additional features
Speakers: 4 speakers, charger, USB cable, cover, SIM tool, 12 Months Warranty, fanless
Weight
455 g
Price
199 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

潜在的竞争对手比较

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Storage
Size
Resolution
Price from
80.7 %
v7 (old)
03 / 2024
Cubot Tab 50
Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2
455 g256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash10.40"2000x1200
81.3 %
v7 (old)
03 / 2024
Oukitel OT8
T7200, Mali-G57 MP1
515 g256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash11.00"1920x1200
83.5 %
v7 (old)
01 / 2024
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
SD 680, Adreno 610
481 g128 GB eMMC Flash11.00"1920x1200
79.4 %
v7 (old)
01 / 2024
Teclast M50 HD
T7200, Mali-G57 MP1
435 g128 GB eMMC Flash10.10"1920x1200

外壳和连接性 - 金属外壳和大量存储空间

中国制造商 Cubot 的 Tab 50 售价约为 200 美元,但你很可能在网上找到更便宜的价格。在这个价位上,很多平板电脑都在争夺潜在买家的注意力,因此我们想仔细看看这款经济实惠的设备。

与同价位产品相比,它的外壳给人的感觉相当高质:它有一个灰色金属背壳和一个金属边框。只有背面顶部有一个闪亮的蓝色塑料插件,有助于改善无线局域网和蜂窝数据的天线连接。背面还有两个相机镜头,其中一个只是装饰,没有实际功能。

这款平板电脑的尺寸为 10.4 英寸,介于两者之间,非常有趣:它比 11 英寸平板电脑稍轻、更小巧,但与此同时,它的显示屏面积比 Oukitel OT8的 10.1 英寸屏幕相比,它的显示面积要稍大一些。

平板电脑屏幕周围的边框大小适中,使其看起来既现代又舒适,不会误触触摸屏。平板电脑非常稳定,几乎无法扭动。

256 GB 的存储容量相当大,8 GB 的内存也很宽裕。绝大多数用户都会觉得够用,但如果不够用,你还可以选择激活 8GB 虚拟内存。虚拟内存是在速度明显较慢的数据内存中以交换文件的形式创建的,因此不太可能带来重大优势。

在内部,USB-C 端口是通过 USB-2.0 连接的,因此无法实现与其他设备的快速数据传输。如果要连接外部音频设备,可以使用平板电脑一角的 3.5 毫米音频插孔。遗憾的是,它不支持用于非接触式支付的 NFC 功能。

microSD 读卡器占据了两个 SIM 卡插槽中的一个。而它的运行速度也相当快:在复制测试中,我们测得的数据传输速率为 42.5 MByte/s。虽然我们没有充分利用 Angelbird V60 microSD 卡的最大数据传输速率,但 Cubot Tab 50 的表现仍然比许多同价位平板电脑要好得多。

尺寸比较

256.8 mm 168.3 mm 7.8 mm 515 g255.53 mm 167.08 mm 7.36 mm 481 g246.4 mm 161.5 mm 7.7 mm 455 g238.4 mm 157.7 mm 8 mm 435 g210 mm 148 mm 1 mm 2.9 g
SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Cubot Tab 50
  (Angelbird V60)
42.5 MB/s
Teclast M50 HD
  (Angelbird V60)
35.2 MB/s -17%
Average of class Tablet
  (7.61 - 101.6, n=59, last 2 years)
34.1 MB/s -20%
Oukitel OT8
  (Angelbird V60)
29.8 MB/s -30%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
  (Angelbird AV Pro V60)
28.92 MB/s -32%

Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)

05101520253035404550556065707580Tooltip
Cubot Tab 50 Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø37.6 (26.9-51.3)
Oukitel OT8 Mali-G57 MP1, T7200, 256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø35.1 (22.3-43.5)
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø36.7 (21.9-44.3)
Teclast M50 HD Mali-G57 MP1, T7200, 128 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø38.1 (30.7-46.7)
Cubot Tab 50 Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø72.5 (13.5-80.7)
Oukitel OT8 Mali-G57 MP1, T7200, 256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø75 (35.3-84.9)
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø64.6 (36.3-77.6)
Teclast M50 HD Mali-G57 MP1, T7200, 128 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø75.2 (41.4-81.8)

通信、软件和操作 - 稳定的无线局域网和 LTE 调制解调器

在无线局域网测试中,我们测得的数据传输速率相对稳定,在 300 - 350 MBit/s 之间。这表明它使用的是 WiFi 5 调制解调器,通过快速查看平板电脑的规格表和我们的系统信息应用程序可以证实这一点。

因此,这款平板电脑的性能处于同类产品的平均水平,但它的传输速率非常稳定,甚至比一些同价位的设备略快。即使离路由器很远,中间隔着三堵墙,它的信号质量也还可以--不过,网页加载速度要比紧靠路由器时慢得多。

Cubot Tab 50 还可以使用蜂窝数据访问网络和拨打电话。这需要使用 nano-SIM,不支持 eSIM。我们测试设备的 LTE 网络种类有限,仅能满足中欧地区的需求,我们的测试就是在中欧地区进行的。因此,如果你想带着这款平板电脑去旅行,应该先了解清楚目的地是否能上网。

Android 这款平板电脑预装了 13,制造商几乎没有对其进行过改动。在测试时,它的最新安全更新是 2023 年 11 月的,所以已经很老了。制造商没有承诺任何更新,所以你只能期待不定期的安全补丁。至少,你可以得到非常纯净的 ,没有任何可能令人讨厌的第三方应用程序。Android

它的触摸屏反应不是很灵敏,但使用起来很方便。它的边角也很灵敏。Tab 50 没有提供指纹传感器或面部识别解锁选项。这意味着在银行应用程序等中也无法使用该选项进行身份验证。

Networking
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
369 (179min - 379max) MBit/s +1%
Cubot Tab 50
364 (349min - 374max) MBit/s
Teclast M50 HD
358 (336min - 370max) MBit/s -2%
Oukitel OT8
356 (334min - 368max) MBit/s -2%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
Cubot Tab 50
324 (292min - 336max) MBit/s
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
307 (284min - 322max) MBit/s -5%
Teclast M50 HD
305 (259min - 319max) MBit/s -6%
Oukitel OT8
304 (242min - 317max) MBit/s -6%

Legend

 
Cubot Tab 50 Mediatek Helio G99, ARM Mali-G57 MP2, 256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
 
Oukitel OT8 Unisoc T7200, ARM Mali-G57 MP1, 256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
 
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Qualcomm Adreno 610, 128 GB eMMC Flash
 
Teclast M50 HD Unisoc T7200, ARM Mali-G57 MP1, 128 GB eMMC Flash
020406080100120140160180200220240260280300320340360Tooltip
Cubot Tab 50; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø324 (292-336)
Cubot Tab 50; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø364 (349-374)

照相机 - 质量差

使用前置摄像头拍摄的照片
使用前置摄像头拍摄的照片

背面有一个 1300 万像素的单摄像头。如果需要,至少还配有 LED 闪光灯。

遗憾的是,在光线非常暗的情况下,该摄像头被证明是完全失败的;在正常的日光下,图像只能稍微变亮。同时,非常明亮的区域很快就会曝光过度,只能捕捉到很少的细节。

当然,你不应该对平板电脑的摄像头抱有太高期望,但 Tab 50 的图像质量确实只能满足在光线良好的条件下拍摄最基本的快照。

前置摄像头拍摄的自拍照模糊不清,在暗处几乎无法辨认出任何细节。

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Main camera plantMain camera surroundingsMain camera low light
orginal image
click to load images
ColorChecker
5.3 ∆E
7 ∆E
10.5 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
11.3 ∆E
6.4 ∆E
7 ∆E
9.8 ∆E
7.3 ∆E
3.5 ∆E
5.7 ∆E
1.8 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
6.3 ∆E
5.4 ∆E
2.3 ∆E
6.8 ∆E
10.7 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
7.3 ∆E
2.7 ∆E
8.1 ∆E
10 ∆E
ColorChecker Cubot Tab 50: 6.7 ∆E min: 1.78 - max: 11.32 ∆E
ColorChecker
29.6 ∆E
54.9 ∆E
39.8 ∆E
35.3 ∆E
45.6 ∆E
62.4 ∆E
53.7 ∆E
36.1 ∆E
44.3 ∆E
29.4 ∆E
65.1 ∆E
64.1 ∆E
31.5 ∆E
47.5 ∆E
38.2 ∆E
76.6 ∆E
45.1 ∆E
42 ∆E
94.3 ∆E
71.4 ∆E
52.5 ∆E
37.5 ∆E
24.4 ∆E
13.9 ∆E
ColorChecker Cubot Tab 50: 47.29 ∆E min: 13.91 - max: 94.33 ∆E

显示屏 - 明显的蓝色色调

子像素阵列
子像素阵列

平板电脑屏幕的分辨率为 2,000 x 1,200 像素,10.4 英寸的屏幕可清晰显示图像。它的最大亮度为 308 cd/m²,仅够在室内使用;在室外,周围环境的反射很快就会妨碍你查看图像内容。

在使用分光光度计和 CalMAN 软件进行测量时,我们发现其显示屏上有很强的蓝色色调,使色彩显得相当冷淡。由于其色彩偏差较大,你不应该依赖屏幕来显示真实的色彩。

我们没有注意到任何 PWM 闪烁,即使在低亮度下也是如此。

291
cd/m²
287
cd/m²
279
cd/m²
295
cd/m²
308
cd/m²
301
cd/m²
286
cd/m²
288
cd/m²
276
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 308 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 290.1 cd/m² Minimum: 7.1 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 90 %
Center on Battery: 308 cd/m²
Contrast: 684:1 (Black: 0.45 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 8.72 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 9.9 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
94.5% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.306
Cubot Tab 50
IPS, 2000x1200, 10.4"
Oukitel OT8
IPS, 1920x1200, 11"
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
TFT-LCD, 1920x1200, 11"
Teclast M50 HD
IPS, 1920x1200, 10.1"
Response Times
-46%
-46%
-81%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
37.2 ?(20.8, 16.4)
42.2 ?(21.8, 20.4)
-13%
47.92 ?(22.26, 25.66)
-29%
67.7 ?(32.8, 34.9)
-82%
Response Time Black / White *
16.3 ?(11.3, 5)
29 ?(14.4, 14.6)
-78%
26.38 ?(11.47, 14.91)
-62%
29.4 ?(12.6, 16.8)
-80%
PWM Frequency
Screen
38%
61%
4%
Brightness middle
308
390
27%
473
54%
246
-20%
Brightness
290
376
30%
449
55%
227
-22%
Brightness Distribution
90
88
-2%
85
-6%
88
-2%
Black Level *
0.45
0.26
42%
0.28
38%
0.33
27%
Contrast
684
1500
119%
1689
147%
745
9%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
8.72
5.19
40%
3
66%
6.28
28%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
14.17
11.19
21%
6
58%
14.1
-0%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
9.9
7.6
23%
2.7
73%
8.8
11%
Gamma
2.306 95%
2.244 98%
2.27 97%
2.277 97%
CCT
9817 66%
8625 75%
6589 99%
8024 81%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-4% / 21%
8% / 39%
-39% / -13%

* ... smaller is better

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
16.3 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 11.3 ms rise
↘ 5 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 34 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
37.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 20.8 ms rise
↘ 16.4 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 50 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM not detected

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8746 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

卡尔曼灰度
卡尔曼灰度
CalMAN 色彩精度
CalMAN 色彩精度
CalMAN sRGB 色彩空间
CalMAN sRGB 色彩空间
CalMAN 饱和度
CalMAN 饱和度

性能、排放和电池续航时间 - 为大量应用程序提供动力

Cubot Tab 50 采用 联发科 Helio G99作为 SoC,这在同价位产品中是相当强大的芯片。因此,它的基准测试成绩明显高于对比设备,而且该设备在处理器和图形处理方面的性能明显更高,也就不足为奇了。

这意味着该系统使用起来相当流畅,而 UFS 2.2 存储系统的良好传输速率也功不可没。

即使在长时间负载的情况下,平板电脑外壳的最高发热温度也仅为 33 °C,因此在使用时不会出现任何问题。正如 3DMark 压力测试显示的那样,SoC 在长时间负载下也不会出现节流现象。

Cubot Tab 50 有四个扬声器,因此可以达到很好的最大音量。不过,它们的声音并不特别饱满。中低音几乎听不到,声音比较平淡。

可通过 3.5 毫米音频插孔或蓝牙连接的外置音频设备的音质要好得多。所有重要的编解码器都可用于无线音频传输,包括 LDAC 和 aptX HD 等高保真编解码器。

Cubot Tab 50 的电池容量为 7500 毫安时,属于中等水平。在我们的无线局域网测试中,Cubot Tab 50 的续航时间为 14:04 小时,这意味着它可以在雨天轻松地在家娱乐。由于配备了 18 瓦的电源,充电时间并不长,但如果电池完全耗尽,则需要等待 4 个小时才能充满电。

Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core
Average of class Tablet
  (140 - 1887, n=71, last 2 years)
707 Points +31%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (490 - 576, n=17)
547 Points +1%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
541 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
384 Points -29%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
305 Points -44%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
303 Points -44%
Multi-Core
Average of class Tablet
  (312 - 8624, n=71, last 2 years)
2496 Points +37%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (1670 - 1981, n=17)
1828 Points +1%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
1818 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1684 Points -7%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
1260 Points -31%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
1191 Points -34%
Geekbench 6.3
Single-Core
Average of class Tablet
  (185 - 3715, n=68, last 2 years)
1093 Points +49%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
732 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (710 - 738, n=11)
728 Points -1%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
413 Points -44%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
372 Points -49%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
371 Points -49%
Multi-Core
Average of class Tablet
  (493 - 14690, n=68, last 2 years)
3518 Points +72%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
2040 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (1864 - 2065, n=11)
1987 Points -3%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1439 Points -29%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
1392 Points -32%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
1327 Points -35%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (8885 - 11379, n=17)
9894 Points +3%
Average of class Tablet
  (3195 - 20841, n=73, last 2 years)
9812 Points +2%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
9586 Points
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
7259 Points -24%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
7068 Points -26%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
6908 Points -28%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1)
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
2601 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (2471 - 2791, n=16)
2593 Points 0%
Average of class Tablet
  (361 - 14235, n=47, last 2 years)
2050 Points -21%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1441 Points -45%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
953 Points -63%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
361 Points -86%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (2326 - 2655, n=16)
2434 Points 0%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
2433 Points
Average of class Tablet
  (290 - 24605, n=47, last 2 years)
2176 Points -11%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1273 Points -48%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
809 Points -67%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
290 Points -88%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
3427 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (3101 - 3471, n=16)
3346 Points -2%
Average of class Tablet
  (858 - 5751, n=47, last 2 years)
2796 Points -18%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
2681 Points -22%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
2519 Points -26%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
2454 Points -28%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Average of class Tablet
  (267 - 17674, n=67, last 2 years)
4452 Points +69%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (2543 - 2843, n=16)
2642 Points 0%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
2632 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1429 Points -46%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
978 Points -63%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
965 Points -63%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Average of class Tablet
  (240 - 29325, n=67, last 2 years)
5806 Points +137%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (2375 - 3908, n=16)
2552 Points +4%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
2449 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1309 Points -47%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
829 Points -66%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
819 Points -67%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Average of class Tablet
  (441 - 7451, n=67, last 2 years)
3620 Points +2%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (3102 - 3798, n=16)
3575 Points 0%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
3561 Points
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
2650 Points -26%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
2563 Points -28%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
2105 Points -41%
Wild Life Score
Average of class Tablet
  (286 - 7933, n=60, last 2 years)
1743 Points +50%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (1165 - 1364, n=17)
1239 Points +6%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
1165 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
589 Points -49%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
425 Points -64%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
423 Points -64%
Wild Life Unlimited Score
Average of class Tablet
  (289 - 32525, n=72, last 2 years)
4578 Points +334%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (1011 - 1340, n=17)
1195 Points +13%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
1056 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
574 Points -46%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
421 Points -60%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
419 Points -60%
Wild Life Extreme
Average of class Tablet
  (75 - 8689, n=73, last 2 years)
1303 Points +279%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (330 - 378, n=17)
346 Points +1%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
344 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
123 Points -64%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
99 Points -71%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
90 Points -74%
Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Average of class Tablet
  (72 - 8889, n=71, last 2 years)
1543 Points +361%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (323 - 366, n=17)
337 Points +1%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
335 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
121 Points -64%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
101 Points -70%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
100 Points -70%
GFXBench
on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Average of class Tablet
  (3 - 120, n=78, last 2 years)
26.9 fps +79%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (12 - 44, n=17)
17.3 fps +15%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
15 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
9 fps -40%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
5.4 fps -64%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
5.1 fps -66%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Average of class Tablet
  (2.5 - 340, n=78, last 2 years)
55 fps +244%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
16 fps
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (14 - 18, n=17)
15.7 fps -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
9.8 fps -39%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
5.5 fps -66%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
5.4 fps -66%
on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Average of class Tablet
  (1.9 - 106.4, n=78, last 2 years)
18.6 fps +96%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (8.3 - 28, n=17)
11.3 fps +19%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
9.5 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
5.3 fps -44%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
3.4 fps -64%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
3.2 fps -66%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Average of class Tablet
  (0.9 - 114.5, n=78, last 2 years)
21 fps +250%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
6 fps
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (5.4 - 6.5, n=17)
5.88 fps -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
3.3 fps -45%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
2 fps -67%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
2 fps -67%
3840x2160 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Average of class Tablet
  (0.4 - 55.1, n=76, last 2 years)
9.87 fps +349%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (2.2 - 2.8, n=17)
2.5 fps +14%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
2.2 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1.4 fps -36%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
0.85 fps -61%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
0.84 fps -62%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Average of class Tablet
  (763 - 105178, n=86, last 2 years)
28653 Points +34%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
21326 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (17228 - 25005, n=17)
20999 Points -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
14279 Points -33%
Teclast M50 HD
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
12397 Points -42%
Oukitel OT8
Unisoc T7200, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
11794 Points -45%
Cubot Tab 50Oukitel OT8Xiaomi Redmi Pad SETeclast M50 HDAverage 256 GB UFS 2.2 FlashAverage of class Tablet
AndroBench 3-5
11%
-47%
-64%
26%
19%
Sequential Read 256KB
976.4
930
-5%
297.47
-70%
266.2
-73%
Sequential Write 256KB
374
606
62%
228.97
-39%
192.3
-49%
Random Read 4KB
183.3
162.2
-12%
102.41
-44%
70.4
-62%
Random Write 4KB
228.4
224.7
-2%
146.92
-36%
61
-73%

温度

Max. Load
 30.5 °C32.8 °C28.2 °C 
 29.8 °C29.4 °C27.4 °C 
 30.2 °C27.6 °C26.5 °C 
Maximum: 32.8 °C
Average: 29.2 °C
29.8 °C33 °C30.2 °C
28.7 °C30.2 °C29.3 °C
27.8 °C28.5 °C28.9 °C
Maximum: 33 °C
Average: 29.6 °C
Power Supply (max.)  41.9 °C | Room Temperature 21 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 29.2 °C / 85 F, compared to the average of 30 °C / 86 F for the devices in the class Tablet.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 32.8 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F, ranging from 20.7 to 53.2 °C for the class Tablet.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 33 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 33.3 °C / 92 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 22.6 °C / 73 F, compared to the device average of 30 °C / 86 F.


正面热图
正面热图
热图返回
热图返回

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

01234567Tooltip
Cubot Tab 50 Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.4.1: Ø2.08 (2.06-2.08)
Oukitel OT8 Mali-G57 MP1, T7200, 256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.4.1: Ø0.645 (0.595-0.693)
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB eMMC Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.4.1: Ø0.726 (0.72-0.741)
Teclast M50 HD Mali-G57 MP1, T7200, 128 GB eMMC Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.4.1: Ø0.633 (0.547-0.721)
Cubot Tab 50 Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø7.06 (6.96-7.47)
Oukitel OT8 Mali-G57 MP1, T7200, 256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø2.53 (2.5-2.54)
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB eMMC Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø3.5 (3.49-3.5)
Teclast M50 HD Mali-G57 MP1, T7200, 128 GB eMMC Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø2.54 (2.53-2.55)
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB eMMC Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø3.52 (3.52-3.53)

发言人

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2037.637.92537.638.33130.726.24033.4295038.436.16324.528.38016.521.810015.81912513.122.716014.626.92008.632.32507.837.13157.249.34008.560.450010.165.363010.963.880010.977.8100012.679.912509.170.616009.662.9200010.161.8250010.864.4315012.765.5400013.264.9500015.264.9630014.375.8800015.372.71000016.165.81250016.358.51600017.250.9SPL24.983.9N0.654.8median 12.6median 63.8Delta2.97.83841.729.431.626.326.532.828.837.838.129.724.322.721.418.921.320.623.312.927.69.227.810.333.27.338.26.846.18.652.312.358.810.759.11164.78.760.18.759.69.257.510.255.811.459.113.265.114.560.414.461.715.35616.352.616.346.517.240.424.772.20.528.3median 11.4median 55.83.310.8hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseCubot Tab 50Teclast M50 HD
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Cubot Tab 50 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 32.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.6% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (12.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.9% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 71% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 21% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 72% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 22% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Teclast M50 HD audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (72.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.2% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (6.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 81% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 16% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 80% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 16% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

运行时间

Battery Runtime - WiFi Websurfing
Oukitel OT8
8800 mAh
1086 min +29%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
8000 mAh
1017 min +20%
Cubot Tab 50
7500 mAh
844 min
Average of class Tablet
  (319 - 1764, n=78, last 2 years)
816 min -3%
Teclast M50 HD
6000 mAh
667 min -21%
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing
14h 04min

Pros

+ 性能良好
+ 存储空间大
+ LTE 调制解调器
+ 稳定的金属外壳
+ 多种蓝牙音频编解码器
+ 快速 microSD 读卡器
+ 稳定的无线局域网信号
+ 库存Android
+ 良好的运行时间
+ 无 PWM

Cons

- 勉强可用的摄像头
- 屏幕暗淡
- ......带着浓重的蓝色调
- 扬声器声音平淡
- 没有生物识别解锁选项

评价:速度快,设备齐全,但不完美

Cubot Tab 50 评测。测试设备由 Cubot 提供。
Cubot Tab 50 评测。测试设备由 Cubot 提供。

Cubot Tab 50 凭借其强大的 SoC 处理器,在众多廉价平板电脑中脱颖而出。它的电池续航时间也不错,金属外壳令人印象深刻,大容量存储空间和手机支持功能也很强大--因此,该设备可以推荐给那些以花很少的钱购买快速平板电脑为主要目的的用户。

不过,那些追求其他品质的用户也不得不接受一些失望:例如,它的摄像头实际上只适合扫描二维码或在紧急情况下拍照。它的扬声器没有充分利用可用的声音空间,只能发出比较平淡的声音。它的安全补丁也相当老旧,你应该期待不定期的更新。如果你想通过指纹或面部识别来保护平板电脑上的数据安全,那也只能另寻他处了。

不过,有些东西我们还是不能不提的,那就是相对较快的 microSD 读卡器、稳定的 WLAN 信号和较低的温度。因此,Cubot Tab 50 的性能有好有坏,你应该在购买前考虑一下哪些功能对你来说是最重要的。

Cubot Tab 50 得益于快速处理器和 LTE 支持。另一方面,如果你正在寻找明亮的显示屏和可用的摄像头,那么你会有点失望。

快速浏览一下替代产品:Teclast M50 HD Teclast M50 HD同样小巧,同样配备 LTE 调制解调器。红米 红米 Pad SE采用 90Hz 面板,但性能远不及我们的测试设备。

价格和供应情况

Cubot Tab 50 应该很快就能在制造商的亚马逊商店买到。它的零售价可能在 200 美元左右。

Cubot Tab 50 - 03/20/2024 v7 (old)
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
79 / 98 → 80%
Keyboard
65 / 80 → 82%
Pointing Device
84%
Connectivity
45 / 70 → 65%
Weight
84 / 40-88 → 91%
Battery
90%
Display
77%
Games Performance
22 / 78 → 28%
Application Performance
68 / 92 → 74%
Temperature
96%
Noise
100%
Audio
64 / 91 → 70%
Camera
41 / 85 → 48%
Average
70%
81%
Tablet - Weighted Average

Transparency

The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was provided to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or retailer for the purpose of this review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. We never accept compensation or payment in return for our reviews. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.

This is how Notebookcheck is testing

Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.

Price comparison

Please share our article, every link counts!
Mail Logo
> Notebookcheck中文版(NBC中国) > 评测 > Cubot Tab 50 评测--配备 LTE 调制解调器和全高清屏幕的极速经济型平板电脑
Florian Schmitt, 2024-03-23 (Update: 2024-03-23)