Verdict
It’s hard to find a 13.4-inch tablet as affordable as the Teclast T65 in the lineup of major manufacturers. Screens this large are usually reserved for flagship models. That gives the T65 an edge, especially since it sells for under €300—and in some cases even below €200.
However, the system can lag during demanding tasks and even in everyday use. The 120 Hz display helps things feel smooth, but the SoC’s limited performance often can’t keep pace.
The relatively small battery, slow charging, and modest-resolution display are compromises you’ll have to accept. The chassis is milled from a single block of metal, but its stability and feel don’t quite match pricier tablets.
The cameras and speakers are serviceable in a pinch but fall short for everyday use.
If you can cope with this and simply want a huge 120 Hz screen for as little money as possible and appreciate the mobile capabilities, the Teclast T65 is a genuine bargain.
Pros
Cons
Price and availability
Translator's note: For the U.S. users, the tablet is listed on Amazon for $169.99.
At amazon.de, the tablet currently costs about €230. It’s even cheaper on Aliexpress, where EU shipping brings the price down to roughly €150.
Table of Contents
- Verdict
- Specifications
- Case and features - Metal unibody like the iPad
- Communication and operation - Teclast tablet with 4G
- Software and sustainability - Are there any updates?
- Cameras - Hardly usable
- Display - Large screen, low resolution
- Performance, emissions and battery life - Not too much power and smaller battery
- Notebookcheck overall rating
- Possible alternatives in comparison
Specifications
Case and features - Metal unibody like the iPad
With the Teclast T65, the Chinese manufacturer brings a 13.4-inch tablet to market in a unibody metal casing. The dark gray finish—called Space Gray—is an obvious nod to Apple’s iPads.
For such an inexpensive device, the chassis looks impressively premium, feels good in the hand, and shows a clean build. A slim plastic strip at the top improves antenna reception. It all looks sharp, though light crackling noises appear when pressed, and pressure marks quickly show on the display.
Weighing 720 grams, the tablet feels solid. Storage is a reasonable 128 GB, expandable via microSD, with card-reader speeds on par with other tablets in this price range.
| SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Teclast T70 (Angelbird V60) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Pad Pro (Angelbird V60) | |
| Lenovo Idea Tab Pro (Angelbird V60) | |
| Teclast T65 (Angelbird V60) | |
| Average of class Tablet (10.2 - 57.4, n=58, last 2 years) | |
Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)
Communication and operation - Teclast tablet with 4G
The Teclast T65 supports Wi-Fi 5 as its fastest wireless standard. In testing, it reached around 300–350 Mbit/s—fine for everyday use, though some budget rivals are noticeably quicker.
However, only a few tablets in this price range offer mobile network support. The T65 supports 4G, giving you the freedom to stay online even when traveling abroad.
The touchscreen runs at up to 120 Hz and responds quickly. However, delays do occur from time to time because of the tablet’s limited overall performance.
There is no fingerprint sensor, and facial recognition isn't supported.
| Networking | |
| Teclast T65 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Teclast T70 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Lenovo Idea Tab Pro | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Pad Pro | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Honor Pad 10 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Average 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Average of class Tablet | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
Software and sustainability - Are there any updates?
The software is based on Android 15 with minimal modifications. The manufacturer hasn’t specified how long updates will be provided. At the time of testing, the security patches on our tablet were from August 2025 and therefore still reasonably up-to-date.
There is no information or commitment from the manufacturer on the subject of sustainability.
Cameras - Hardly usable
There is a fairly simple 13 megapixel camera on the back. It is sufficient for scanning documents in good light or taking snapshots, but it is hardly suitable for taking good photos: The images have a bluish cast and quickly become too bright in bright areas.
The front camera delivers acceptable selfies, though detail is limited.
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.
Prim. camera - flowersPrim. camera - outsidePrim. camera - low light
Display - Large screen, low resolution
At 13.4 inches, the screen of the Teclast T65 is very large. The resolution of 1,920 x 1,200 pixels seems quite low, resulting in a pixel density of only 169 PPI. This makes the picture look a little coarse from time to time.
Maximum brightness reaches about 380 cd/m², adequate indoors but prone to reflections in bright outdoor light.
Colors are generally accurate but struggle with blue tones and show a faint violet cast overall.
We did not notice PWM flickering even at very low brightness levels.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 91 %
Center on Battery: 379 cd/m²
Contrast: 1354:1 (Black: 0.28 cd/m²)
ΔE ColorChecker Calman: 6.01 | ∀{0.5-29.43 Ø4.79}
ΔE Greyscale Calman: 7 | ∀{0.09-98 Ø5}
77.2% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.253
CCT: 7361 K
| Teclast T65 IPS, 1920x1200, 13.4" | Teclast T70 IPS, 1920x1200, 14" | Lenovo Idea Tab Pro IPS, 2944x1840, 12.7" | Xiaomi Redmi Pad Pro IPS, 2560x1600, 12.1" | Honor Pad 10 IPS, 2560x1600, 12.1" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 6% | 9% | 20% | 20% | |
| Brightness middle (cd/m²) | 379 | 400 6% | 409 8% | 513 35% | 529 40% |
| Brightness (cd/m²) | 357 | 385 8% | 388 9% | 480 34% | 499 40% |
| Brightness Distribution (%) | 91 | 92 1% | 89 -2% | 86 -5% | 91 0% |
| Black Level * (cd/m²) | 0.28 | 0.36 -29% | 0.4 -43% | 0.4 -43% | 0.5 -79% |
| Contrast (:1) | 1354 | 1111 -18% | 1023 -24% | 1283 -5% | 1058 -22% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 6.01 | 5.15 14% | 3.46 42% | 2.82 53% | 2 67% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 13.04 | 10.41 20% | 5.46 58% | 8.83 32% | 4.79 63% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 7 | 4 43% | 5.2 26% | 2.9 59% | 3.6 49% |
| Gamma | 2.253 98% | 2.131 103% | 2.106 104% | 2.265 97% | 2.248 98% |
| CCT | 7361 88% | 7235 90% | 5823 112% | 7189 90% | 7398 88% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| 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 8152 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 25.9 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 9.9 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 16 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. » 61 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (20.3 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 33.7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 17.5 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 16.2 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. » 45 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (31.7 ms). | ||
Performance, emissions and battery life - Not too much power and smaller battery
The Teclast T65 runs on a Unisoc T620 SoC, a basic chip that shows its limits in benchmarks. Everyday tasks are mostly smooth, but animations sometimes stutter and heavier apps are barely usable.
Storage speed is acceptable, keeping load times and data transfers within reason, though many competing tablets are noticeably faster.
Heat buildup stays moderate even during extended use, and the SoC only throttles minimally.
The tablet comes with two speakers, which are located on the bottom edge. The sound is very treble-heavy. Unfortunately, only the most basic codecs are available for audio transmission via Bluetooth.
The 8,000 mAh battery is small for a tablet of this size. In our Wi-Fi test, it managed 13 hours and 44 minutes—respectable, but some similarly priced rivals last much longer.
The charging time is very long at over 3 hours, which is also due to the fact that the maximum charging power is only 10 watts.
| Geekbench AI | |
| Single Precision NPU 1.5 | |
| Average of class Tablet (166 - 5295, n=26, last 2 years) | |
| Honor Pad 10 | |
| Teclast T65 | |
| Average UNISOC T7280 (T620) (n=1) | |
| Half Precision NPU 1.5 | |
| Average of class Tablet (154 - 41155, n=26, last 2 years) | |
| Honor Pad 10 | |
| Teclast T65 | |
| Average UNISOC T7280 (T620) (n=1) | |
| Quantized NPU 1.5 | |
| Average of class Tablet (88 - 57388, n=26, last 2 years) | |
| Honor Pad 10 | |
| Teclast T65 | |
| Average UNISOC T7280 (T620) (n=1) | |
| Jetstream 2 - 2.0 Total Score | |
| Average of class Tablet (22.3 - 395, n=72, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Idea Tab Pro | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Pad Pro | |
| Honor Pad 10 | |
| Teclast T65 | |
| Average UNISOC T7280 (T620) (n=1) | |
| PCMark for Android - Work 3.0 | |
| Lenovo Idea Tab Pro | |
| Honor Pad 10 | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Pad Pro | |
| Average of class Tablet (3195 - 27428, n=85, last 2 years) | |
| Teclast T65 | |
| Average UNISOC T7280 (T620) (n=1) | |
| Teclast T70 | |
| Teclast T65 | Teclast T70 | Lenovo Idea Tab Pro | Xiaomi Redmi Pad Pro | Honor Pad 10 | Average 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash | Average of class Tablet | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -6% | 287% | 12% | 116% | -7% | 62% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB (MB/s) | 983 | 975.4 -1% | 3648.3 271% | 844.9 -14% | 1918.12 95% | 736 ? -25% | 1656 ? 68% |
| Sequential Write 256KB (MB/s) | 574 | 505.3 -12% | 3298.5 475% | 705.3 23% | 1632.94 184% | 532 ? -7% | 1213 ? 111% |
| Random Read 4KB (MB/s) | 173 | 165.1 -5% | 474.4 174% | 215.5 25% | 342.88 98% | 193 ? 12% | 235 ? 36% |
| Random Write 4KB (MB/s) | 203 | 195.5 -4% | 668 229% | 231.4 14% | 375.28 85% | 186.3 ? -8% | 267 ? 32% |
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 34.2 °C / 94 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 32.6 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °C / 92 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 23.3 °C / 74 F, compared to the device average of 30 °C / 86 F.
3DMark Stress Tests
| 3DMark - Wild Life Extreme Stress Test | |
| Honor Pad 10 | |
| Teclast T70 | |
| Xiaomi Redmi Pad Pro | |
| Teclast T65 | |
| Lenovo Idea Tab Pro | |
Teclast T65 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.8% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 62% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 32% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 56% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 37% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Honor Pad 10 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (89.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 12% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.6% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.3% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (13.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 25% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 70% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 13% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 83% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
| Teclast T65 8000 mAh | Teclast T70 10000 mAh | Lenovo Idea Tab Pro 10200 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi Pad Pro 10000 mAh | Honor Pad 10 10100 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery runtime | 15% | -3% | 12% | 7% | |
| WiFi v1.3 (h) | 13.7 | 15.7 15% | 13.3 -3% | 15.4 12% | 14.7 7% |
| H.264 (h) | 17.1 | 17 | 17.5 | ||
| Reader / Idle (h) | 25.4 | 37.3 | |||
| Load (h) | 4.3 | 4.1 |
Notebookcheck overall rating
If you want a large tablet with mobile connectivity for a very low price, you should take a look at the Teclast T65.
Just be aware of its limitations.
Teclast T65
- 09/20/2025 v8
Florian Schmitt
Total Sustainability Score: Possible alternatives in comparison
Image | Model / Review | Price | Weight | Drive | Display |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 74%  | Teclast T65 UNISOC T7280 (T620) ⎘ ARM Mali-G57 MP1 ⎘ 8 GB Memory, 128 GB UFS 2.1 | Amazon: List Price: 270€ | 720 g | 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash | 13.40" 1920x1200 169 PPI IPS |
2. 72.8%  | Teclast T70 Mediatek Helio G99 ⎘ ARM Mali-G57 MP2 ⎘ 8 GB Memory, 256 GB UFS 2.1 | Amazon: 1. $17.89 Screen Protector for TECLAST... 2. $16.89 for Teclast T70 /Callsky-Tab... 3. $19.99 14.1-inch Android Tablet Cas... List Price: 270€ | 960 g | 256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash | 14.00" 1920x1200 162 PPI IPS |
3. 82.3%  | Lenovo Idea Tab Pro MediaTek Dimensity 8300 ⎘ ARM Mali-G615 MP6 ⎘ 8 GB Memory, 256 GB | Amazon: 1. $359.99 Lenovo Idea Tab Pro with Goo... 2. $309.99 Lenovo Idea Tab Pro TB373FU ... 3. $14.98 JETech Screen Protector for ... List Price: 379€ | 620 g | 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 12.70" 2944x1840 273 PPI IPS |
4. 78.7%  | Xiaomi Redmi Pad Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 2 ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 710 ⎘ 6 GB Memory, 128 GB UFS 2.1 | Amazon: $299.99 List Price: 380€ | 571 g | 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash | 12.10" 2560x1600 249 PPI IPS |
5. 81.5%  | Honor Pad 10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3 ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 720 ⎘ 8 GB Memory, 256 GB | Amazon: 1. $13.99 A-BEAUTY Rotating Case Compa... 2. $16.19 Ibywind for Honor Pad 10 Scr... 3. $20.69 AKABEILA Compatible with Hon... List Price: 300 Euro | 525 g | 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 12.10" 2560x1600 249 PPI IPS |
Transparency
The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was freely purchased by the author at his/her own expense. 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. 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.
