Oppo Pad Air平板电脑评测 - 良好的扬声器和充足的电池

Name: Oppo Pad Air
Brand: Oppo

重量轻，外观漂亮。

超过300欧元的价格，Oppo Pad Air不再是最便宜的平板电脑之一。作为回报，它提供了高质量的外观和快速的内存。我们的评论解释了它是否能在强大的竞争中保持自己的地位。

Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy), Published 01/27/2023 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

ARM Android Tablet Touchscreen

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Oppo Pad Air (Pad Series)

Processor

Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G 8 x 1.8 - 2.4 GHz, Kryo 265 Gold (Cortex-A73) / Silver (Cortex-A53)

Graphics adapter

Qualcomm Adreno 610

Memory

4 GB

Display

10.36 inch 5:3, 2000 x 1200 pixel 225 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, IPS, glossy: yes, 120 Hz

Storage

128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash, 128 GB

, 110 GB free

Connections

1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Card Reader: microSD up to 512 GB, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, gyro, proximity

Networking

802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 5.0

Size

height x width x depth (in mm): 6.9 x 245.1 x 154.8

Battery

7100 mAh Lithium-Polymer, 18 Watt charging

Charging

fast charging / Quickcharge

Operating System

Android 12

Camera

Primary Camera: 8 MPix f/2.0, AF
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix f/2.2

Additional features

charger, USB cable, SIM tool, 12 Months Warranty, fanless

Weight

440 g

Price

350 Euro

Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

see all specifications

潜在的竞争对手比较

Rating	Date	Model	Weight	Height	Size	Resolution
83.1 % v7 ^(old)	01 / 2023	Oppo Pad Air SD 680, Adreno 610	440 g	6.9 mm	10.36"	2000x1200
81.2 % v7 ^(old)	01 / 2023	Huawei MatePad SE SD 680, Adreno 610	440 g	7.9 mm	10.40"	2000x1200
81.7 % v7 ^(old)	11 / 2022	Honor Pad 8 SD 680, Adreno 610	520 g	6.9 mm	12.00"	2000x1200
84.6 % v7 ^(old)	12 / 2022	Xiaomi Redmi Pad Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2	445 g	7.05 mm	10.61"	2000x1200
81 % v7 ^(old)	02 / 2022	Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 T618, Mali-G52 MP2	508 g	6.9 mm	10.50"	1920x1200

外壳和功能 - 纤细和轻巧

通过Pad Air，Oppo带来了一款拥有10.36英寸屏幕的轻型平板电脑，它不是最便宜的设备之一，但它看起来也非常别致。

一条塑料条横跨背面的外壳边缘，由于其图案让人想起树皮或波浪。一方面，这条塑料条确保了更好的第一印象，因为背面的其他部分是由金属制成的。另一方面，它的光泽效果与外壳的其他部分不同，因此是一个视觉亮点。

这款平板电脑相当轻，只有440克，而且轮廓非常纤细，只有6.9毫米。不过，这个棱角分明的外壳拿在手里感觉很好。屏幕的边缘是通常的大小，所以你可以握住平板电脑而不会无意中触发触摸屏上的指令。

稳定性很好，但平板电脑在某些地方会被压住并轻微扭曲。

奥普提供了两种存储变体的平板电脑。

4GB内存/64GB大容量存储。300欧元
4GB内存/128GB大容量存储。350欧元

没有LTE变体，也没有用于移动支付的NFC模块。

然而，存储空间可以通过microSD插槽扩展。在我们使用Angelbird V60参考卡的基准测试中，读取率反复下降，但该阅读器在其他方面提供了良好的传输率。

尺寸比较

SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Angelbird AV Pro V60)	49.18 MB/s +131%
Oppo Pad Air Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash (Angelbird V60)	21.3 MB/s
Huawei MatePad SE Adreno 610, SD 680, 64 GB eMMC Flash (Angelbird V60)	19.7 MB/s -8%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash (Angelbird AV Pro V60)	9.48 MB/s -55%

Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)

Oppo Pad Air Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB: Ø24.8 (17.2-44.9)

Huawei MatePad SE Adreno 610, SD 680, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB: Ø36.1 (13.9-54.3)

Xiaomi Redmi Pad Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø35.8 (6.67-45.8)

Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø32.7 (13.3-40.3)

Oppo Pad Air Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB: Ø76.1 (44.8-88)

Huawei MatePad SE Adreno 610, SD 680, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB: Ø52.3 (17.2-85.2)

Xiaomi Redmi Pad Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø66.1 (7.54-78.5)

Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø74.6 (37.9-86.8)

通讯、软件和操作 - 人脸识别的问题

由于有了WiFi 5，Oppo Pad Air可以相当迅速地浏览WLAN。然而，在我们用参考路由器华硕ROG Rapture AXE11000进行的测试中，我们注意到该平板电脑在接收方向上比竞争对手要慢一些，而传输方面的问题较少。

WLAN模块的接收在路由器附近是完美的，在10米的距离和穿过3堵墙时，它的信号强度仍然是50%。互联网页面在那里的加载速度也相当快，所以你不必为Pad Air在家里到处安装WLAN中继器。

Oppo的ColorOS 12.1是基于Android 12。在测试时，这款平板电脑仍然合理地更新了2022年12月的安全补丁。奥普已经承诺了很长时间的更新，但只针对某些型号。Pad Air将被更新多长时间还有待观察。至少计划在2013年上半年更新到Android 13。

由于120赫兹，触摸屏的反应非常灵敏，可以精确地使用到角落。

该平板电脑没有用于生物识别解锁的指纹传感器。然而，可以使用面部识别。这并不是很好的工作。你必须把你的脸靠近平板电脑，但即使这样也不能可靠地识别。由于缺乏额外的硬件，这种方法也不是很安全。

Networking
iperf3 receive AXE11000
Xiaomi Redmi Pad Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash	367 (358^min - 370^max) MBit/s +20%
Honor Pad 8 Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash	345 (326^min - 357^max) MBit/s +13%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash	325 (163^min - 328^max) MBit/s +6%
Huawei MatePad SE Adreno 610, SD 680, 64 GB eMMC Flash	310 (284^min - 330^max) MBit/s +1%
Oppo Pad Air Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash	306 (289^min - 326^max) MBit/s
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
Xiaomi Redmi Pad Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash	369 (179^min - 379^max) MBit/s +3%
Huawei MatePad SE Adreno 610, SD 680, 64 GB eMMC Flash	365 (352^min - 379^max) MBit/s +2%
Honor Pad 8 Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash	357 (323^min - 366^max) MBit/s 0%
Oppo Pad Air Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash	357 (257^min - 376^max) MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash	349 (178^min - 357^max) MBit/s -2%

Oppo Pad Air; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø306 (289-326)

Oppo Pad Air; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø357 (257-376)

照相机 - 你可以拍摄照片...

与大多数平板电脑一样，相机设备也相当简单。背面有一个海力士的800万像素传感器。它拍摄的照片有些暗淡，不是很详细，在黑暗或非常明亮的地方也很明显缺乏动态。在放大的情况下，由于镜头的保护玻璃不均匀，图片质量很差。

在光线很弱、对比度很高的情况下，效果也相当平庸；至少你可以在照片中认出一些东西。然而，许多地方看起来像素很高，动态效果也很不理想。

视频可以在1080p和最多30帧的情况下录制。自动对焦在这里有延迟，而且在光线较弱的情况下颜色也会丢失。

前置摄像头的分辨率为500万像素。在光线良好的情况下，它可以拍出可用的自拍，但它显示了放大后显示的细节有多粗糙。在黑暗区域也缺乏细节。

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 Main camera Low Light

click to load images

click to load images

click to load images

显示 - 不同的亮度

Oppo指定360尼特为Pad Air显示屏的最大亮度。我们的测量结果略低于此，Oppo Pad Air也是对比领域中屏幕最暗的平板电脑。亮度足够在客厅里使用，但在户外很快就会出现反光问题。

作为回报，该面板的最大帧率为120赫兹，这是所有竞争对手都无法声称的。因此，滚动更顺畅，平板电脑的反应能力也更强。

对比度相当低，不应期待Oppo Pad Air的显示屏有明亮的色彩。在详细的测量中，肉眼也可以看到明亮的灰度中的偏蓝。特别是明亮的橙色调强烈地偏离了色彩空间的最佳状态。

在我们的测量中，我们没有检测到显示器的PWM。


315 cd/m²	339 cd/m²	358 cd/m²
325 cd/m²	352 cd/m²	357 cd/m²
303 cd/m²	351 cd/m²	355 cd/m²

Distribution of brightness

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Maximum: 358 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 339.4 cd/m² Minimum: 2.28 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 85 %
Center on Battery: 352 cd/m²
Contrast: 782:1 (Black: 0.45 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.79 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 5.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
97.9% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.118

	Oppo Pad Air IPS, 2000x1200, 10.4"	Huawei MatePad SE IPS, 2000x1200, 10.4"	Honor Pad 8 IPS, 2000x1200, 12"	Xiaomi Redmi Pad IPS, 2000x1200, 10.6"	Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 TFT-LCD, 1920x1200, 10.5"
Screen		23%	11%	37%	-20%
Brightness middle	352	398 13%	379 8%	418 19%	368 5%
Brightness	339	368 9%	382 13%	402 19%	346 2%
Brightness Distribution	85	87 2%	84 -1%	90 6%	91 7%
Black Level *	0.45	0.46 -2%	0.3 33%	0.28 38%	0.61 -36%
Contrast	782	865 11%	1263 62%	1493 91%	603 -23%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	4.79	2.17 55%	4.76 1%	2.3 52%	6.9 -44%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	8.65	4.32 50%	9.25 -7%	5.4 38%	11.4 -32%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	5.5	3.1 44%	6.7 -22%	3.7 33%	7.7 -40%
Gamma	2.118 ^104%	2.214 ^99%	2.234 ^98%	2.21 ^100%	2.16 ^102%
CCT	7889 ^82%	7245 ^90%	8468 ^77%	6595 ^99%	8547 ^76%

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ

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 8738 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

Display Response Times

ℹ

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
25.7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 14.4 ms rise
25.7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 11.3 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 59 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
42.7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 23.7 ms rise
42.7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 19 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. » 67 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms).

性能、排放和电池寿命 - 良好的运行时间

随着高通Snapdragon 680oppo公司选择了一种经常用于价格较低的平板电脑的SoC：例如华为MatePad SE或 Honor Pad 8.

它为大部分流畅的系统操作提供了足够的性能，但你不应该期待更高的要求，多任务处理也可能是一个问题，这取决于使用的应用程序。小米的红米Pad提供了相当多的动力。

尽管有120赫兹的屏幕，但要求高的游戏玩家可能不得不另寻他处；SoC的功率不足以满足许多移动游戏的高设置。

OPPO可以在内存方面得分：制造商安装了UFS 2.2闪存，而不是缓慢的eMMC，从而使华为和三星的平板电脑退居次席。这缩短了加载时间，加快了数据传输速度。

我们注意到，在温度测量中，即使在较长的负载下，平板电脑也几乎没有升温。此外，即使在多次基准运行后，SoC仍然保持其性能。

我们喜欢扬声器的声音，它不会过度膨胀，还集成了较低的中音。那些仍然喜欢连接耳机或外部扬声器的人可以通过USB-C或蓝牙来实现。无线编解码器是aptX、aptX HD、SBC、AAC和LDAC。

在电池寿命方面，这款轻便的平板电脑以其相当高容量的电池而令人信服，在我们的WLAN测试中，它的电池寿命达到13:43小时。小米小米红米Pad仍然可以做得更好，但Oppo Pad Air总体上非常适用于日常使用，在不插电的情况下绝对可以维持一天的高强度使用。

如果你确实要给它充电，你可以用高达18瓦的功率来做。电池需要大约3个小时，直到再次充满电。

Geekbench 5.5 / Single-Core
Average of class Tablet (140 - 1887, n=71, last 2 years)	707 Points +86%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	558 Points +46%
Oppo Pad Air	381 Points
Honor Pad 8	377 Points -1%
Huawei MatePad SE	377 Points -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (323 - 386, n=15)	374 Points -2%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	365 Points -4%

Geekbench 5.5 / Multi-Core
Average of class Tablet (312 - 8624, n=71, last 2 years)	2496 Points +54%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	1889 Points +16%
Huawei MatePad SE	1630 Points 0%
Oppo Pad Air	1625 Points
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (1287 - 1738, n=15)	1585 Points -2%
Honor Pad 8	1522 Points -6%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	1229 Points -24%

PCMark for Android / Work 3.0
Average of class Tablet (3195 - 20841, n=73, last 2 years)	9812 Points +53%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	9475 Points +48%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	7447 Points +16%
Honor Pad 8	6655 Points +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (4535 - 8730, n=15)	6633 Points +3%
Oppo Pad Air	6423 Points
Huawei MatePad SE	5432 Points -15%

3DMark / Wild Life Score
Average of class Tablet (286 - 7933, n=60, last 2 years)	1743 Points +286%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	1237 Points +174%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	712 Points +58%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (437 - 602, n=15)	471 Points +4%
Oppo Pad Air	452 Points
Honor Pad 8	447 Points -1%
Huawei MatePad SE	441 Points -2%

3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
Average of class Tablet (289 - 32525, n=72, last 2 years)	4578 Points +924%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	1215 Points +172%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	708 Points +58%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (417 - 585, n=15)	457 Points +2%
Oppo Pad Air	447 Points
Honor Pad 8	445 Points 0%
Huawei MatePad SE	440 Points -2%

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
Average of class Tablet (75 - 8689, n=73, last 2 years)	1303 Points +951%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	343 Points +177%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	184 Points +48%
Oppo Pad Air	124 Points
Honor Pad 8	123 Points -1%
Huawei MatePad SE	121 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (22 - 130, n=16)	116.1 Points -6%

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Average of class Tablet (72 - 8889, n=71, last 2 years)	1543 Points +1134%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	329 Points +163%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	179 Points +43%
Oppo Pad Air	125 Points
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (112 - 130, n=14)	122.6 Points -2%
Honor Pad 8	122 Points -2%
Huawei MatePad SE	120 Points -4%

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Average of class Tablet (267 - 17674, n=67, last 2 years)	4452 Points +228%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	2644 Points +95%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	1463 Points +8%
Oppo Pad Air	1359 Points
Honor Pad 8	1356 Points 0%
Huawei MatePad SE	1330 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (267 - 1478, n=15)	1278 Points -6%

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Average of class Tablet (240 - 29325, n=67, last 2 years)	5806 Points +390%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	2442 Points +106%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	1284 Points +8%
Honor Pad 8	1184 Points 0%
Oppo Pad Air	1184 Points
Huawei MatePad SE	1156 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (240 - 1324, n=15)	1143 Points -3%

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	3717 Points +32%
Average of class Tablet (441 - 7451, n=67, last 2 years)	3620 Points +29%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	2865 Points +2%
Huawei MatePad SE	2809 Points 0%
Oppo Pad Air	2807 Points
Honor Pad 8	2751 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (441 - 2853, n=15)	2393 Points -15%

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	2452 Points +89%
Average of class Tablet (615 - 7863, n=50, last 2 years)	1959 Points +51%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	1488 Points +15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (1234 - 1428, n=14)	1300 Points 0%
Oppo Pad Air	1297 Points
Honor Pad 8	1265 Points -2%
Huawei MatePad SE	1255 Points -3%

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	2360 Points +108%
Average of class Tablet (521 - 10276, n=50, last 2 years)	2044 Points +80%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	1340 Points +18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (1087 - 1278, n=14)	1152 Points +1%
Oppo Pad Air	1137 Points
Honor Pad 8	1115 Points -2%
Huawei MatePad SE	1101 Points -3%

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	2841 Points +11%
Oppo Pad Air	2560 Points
Average of class Tablet (1370 - 4352, n=50, last 2 years)	2520 Points -2%
Huawei MatePad SE	2458 Points -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (2185 - 2576, n=14)	2446 Points -4%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	2422 Points -5%
Honor Pad 8	2389 Points -7%

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1)
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	2583 Points +93%
Average of class Tablet (361 - 14235, n=47, last 2 years)	2050 Points +53%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	1425 Points +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (1231 - 1463, n=14)	1350 Points +1%
Honor Pad 8	1341 Points 0%
Oppo Pad Air	1337 Points
Huawei MatePad SE	1312 Points -2%

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	2412 Points +108%
Average of class Tablet (290 - 24605, n=47, last 2 years)	2176 Points +87%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	1252 Points +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (1077 - 1294, n=14)	1179 Points +1%
Honor Pad 8	1174 Points +1%
Oppo Pad Air	1162 Points
Huawei MatePad SE	1141 Points -2%

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	3439 Points +22%
Oppo Pad Air	2830 Points
Average of class Tablet (858 - 5751, n=47, last 2 years)	2796 Points -1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	2768 Points -2%
Huawei MatePad SE	2754 Points -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (2301 - 2930, n=14)	2707 Points -4%
Honor Pad 8	2679 Points -5%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Average of class Tablet (2.5 - 340, n=78, last 2 years)	55 fps +467%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	14 fps +44%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	10 fps +3%
Oppo Pad Air	9.7 fps
Honor Pad 8	9.6 fps -1%
Huawei MatePad SE	9.3 fps -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (5.1 - 9.8, n=15)	9.13 fps -6%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Average of class Tablet (3 - 120, n=78, last 2 years)	26.9 fps +202%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	12 fps +35%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	9.9 fps +11%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (4.6 - 17, n=15)	9.44 fps +6%
Oppo Pad Air	8.9 fps
Huawei MatePad SE	8.6 fps -3%
Honor Pad 8	8.4 fps -6%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Average of class Tablet (0.9 - 114.5, n=78, last 2 years)	21 fps +556%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	5.4 fps +69%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	3.6 fps +13%
Honor Pad 8	3.2 fps 0%
Oppo Pad Air	3.2 fps
Huawei MatePad SE	3.2 fps 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (1.4 - 3.3, n=15)	3.09 fps -3%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Average of class Tablet (1.9 - 106.4, n=78, last 2 years)	18.6 fps +251%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	8.4 fps +58%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	6 fps +13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (2.7 - 11, n=15)	5.61 fps +6%
Oppo Pad Air	5.3 fps
Huawei MatePad SE	5.2 fps -2%
Honor Pad 8	4.9 fps -8%

GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Average of class Tablet (0.4 - 55.1, n=76, last 2 years)	9.87 fps +605%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	2.4 fps +71%
Honor Pad 8	1.4 fps 0%
Oppo Pad Air	1.4 fps
Huawei MatePad SE	1.4 fps 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (1.3 - 1.5, n=10)	1.4 fps 0%

Octane V2 / Total Score
Average of class Tablet (763 - 105178, n=86, last 2 years)	28653 Points +131%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad	17557 Points +42%
Honor Pad 8	13831 Points +12%
Oppo Pad Air	12402 Points
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (6358 - 15553, n=12)	11775 Points -5%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	10787 Points -13%
Huawei MatePad SE	10370 Points -16%

Legend

Oppo Pad Air Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Qualcomm Adreno 610, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash

Huawei MatePad SE Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Qualcomm Adreno 610, 64 GB eMMC Flash

Honor Pad 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Qualcomm Adreno 610, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash

Xiaomi Redmi Pad Mediatek Helio G99, ARM Mali-G57 MP2, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash

Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 UNISOC T618, ARM Mali-G52 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash

Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G

Average of class Tablet

	Oppo Pad Air	Huawei MatePad SE	Honor Pad 8	Xiaomi Redmi Pad	Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022	Average 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash	Average of class Tablet
AndroBench 3-5		-72%	1%	30%	-72%	-8%	6%
Sequential Read 256KB	921.6	293.6 -68%	833.56 -10%	976.9 6%	255.1 -72%	728 ?(303 - 1038, n=71) -21%	1045 ?(163 - 3912, n=74, last 2 years) 13%
Sequential Write 256KB	717	99.5 -86%	708.51 -1%	883.6 23%	101.1 -86%	527 ?(103.2 - 903, n=71) -26%	684 ?(78.2 - 3154, n=74, last 2 years) -5%
Random Read 4KB	177.1	61.8 -65%	189.57 7%	250.82 42%	68.3 -61%	191.7 ?(89.3 - 297, n=71) 8%	189.2 ?(18.4 - 451, n=74, last 2 years) 7%
Random Write 4KB	172.8	54 -69%	186.95 8%	257.02 49%	57.5 -67%	185.8 ?(62.6 - 419, n=71) 8%	189.5 ?(8.23 - 555, n=74, last 2 years) 10%

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

Oppo Pad Air Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; 0.0.0.0: Ø2.7 (2.68-2.71)

Huawei MatePad SE Adreno 610, SD 680, 64 GB eMMC Flash; 0.0.0.0: Ø2.64 (2.64-2.64)

Honor Pad 8 Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; 0.0.0.0: Ø2.68 (2.67-2.68)

Xiaomi Redmi Pad Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; 0.0.0.0: Ø7.45 (7.39-7.47)

Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash; 0.0.0.0: Ø4.26 (4.25-4.27)

Max. Load

Idle


30.7 °C	31.7 °C	23.7 °C
29 °C	27.2 °C	23.4 °C
27.2 °C	24.3 °C	22.7 °C

Maximum: 31.7 °C
Average: 26.7 °C


23.8 °C	27.6 °C	28 °C
23.5 °C	25.8 °C	27 °C
23.3 °C	24.9 °C	25.9 °C

Maximum: 28 °C
Average: 25.5 °C

Power Supply (max.) 42.3 °C | Room Temperature 20.3 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260

(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 26.7 °C / 80 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 31.7 °C / 89 F, compared to the average of 33.7 °C / 93 F, ranging from 20.7 to 53.2 °C for the class Tablet.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 28 °C / 82 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °C / 92 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 22.5 °C / 73 F, compared to the device average of 30 °C / 86 F.

Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)

Oppo Pad Air audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.2% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 52% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 40% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 47% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 45% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 52% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 40% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 47% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 45% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Battery Runtime


WiFi Websurfing		13h 43min

	Oppo Pad Air 7100 mAh	Huawei MatePad SE 5100 mAh	Honor Pad 8 7250 mAh	Xiaomi Redmi Pad 8000 mAh	Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022 7040 mAh
Battery Runtime		-22%	-11%	28%	-17%
WiFi v1.3	823	638 -22%	733 -11%	1057 28%	679 -17%
Reader / Idle		2009	2448	3640	1973
H.264		958	838	971	824
Load		249	225	310	230

Pros

+ 无PWM的120Hz屏幕

+ 很轻

+ 舒适的外壳

+ 良好的运行时间

+ 快速内存

+ 完整的扬声器声音

Cons

- 相对昂贵

- 繁琐的人脸识别

- 相机质量差

- 屏幕亮度低

结论 - 如果你能负担得起，你会得到一个好的平板电脑

Oppo Pad Air并不十分便宜，但它提供了一个非常别致和轻巧的外壳，一个大电池，可以实现长时间运行，以及快速的内存。

黑屏显示，Oppo Pad Air的首选使用领域是室内。因此，摄像头更适合于扫描东西或做视觉笔记，而不是拍摄伟大的自然风光。

这款平板电脑的一个特点是其快速的120赫兹屏幕，可以实现非常流畅的滚动，也可以在没有PWM的情况下进行管理。

你不应该过分依赖人脸识别：它的工作方式比其他平板电脑更不可靠，更笨拙。

Oppo Pad Air是一款并不便宜的平板电脑，拥有120赫兹的屏幕，良好的扬声器，以及较长的运行时间。

华为华为MatePad SE提供了相同的SoC，价格却低得多，但你必须接受其操作系统的特殊性。三星的Galaxy Tab A8也根据要求提供了LTE，但电池的寿命没有那么长。

价格和可用性

由于专利纠纷，Oppo目前没有在德国通过自己的网站销售该平板电脑。

然而，你可以从amazon.de获得它：与64 GB的大容量存储版本在测试时的价格约为271欧元，而amazon.de提供128GB的平板电脑，价格为314欧元。

Oppo Pad Air - 01/25/2023 v7 ^(old)
Florian Schmitt

Chassis

83 / 98 → 85%

Keyboard

65 / 80 → 82%

Pointing Device

96%

Connectivity

37 / 70 → 53%

Weight

84 / 40-88 → 92%

Battery

90%

Display

81%

Games Performance

16 / 78 → 21%

Application Performance

57 / 92 → 62%

Temperature

97%

Noise

100%

Audio

80 / 91 → 88%

Camera

42 / 85 → 50%

Average

71%

83%

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.