Notebookcheck Logo

Cubot Tab 50 review – The speedy budget tablet with an LTE modem and a Full HD screen

Lots of power and lots of storage. The Tab 50 is an affordable tablet with a fast SoC that can access the web via LTE. This promises a lot, but is the Cubot tablet truly a good purchase for all potential users?
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 ( = 0.3 x 9.7 x 6.36 in)
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 ( = 16.05 oz / 1 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
199 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Possible competitors compared

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Storage
Size
Resolution
Price from
80.7 %
03/2024
Cubot Tab 50
Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2
455 g256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash10.40"2000x1200
81.3 %
03/2024
Oukitel OT8
T606, Mali-G57 MP1
515 g256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash11.00"1920x1200
83.5 %
01/2024
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
SD 680, Adreno 610
481 g128 GB eMMC Flash11.00"1920x1200
79.4 %
01/2024
Teclast M50 HD
T606, Mali-G57 MP1
435 g128 GB eMMC Flash10.10"1920x1200

Case and connectivity – A metal case and plenty of storage

The Chinese manufacturer Cubot charges around US$200 for the Tab 50, but you will likely be able to find it even cheaper online. Within this price class, lots of tablets fight for the attention of potential buyers, so we want to take a closer look at this affordable device.

Its case feels pretty high-quality for its price: It has a gray metal back and a metal frame. Only the top of the back features a shiny blue plastic insert to help improve the antenna's connection for WLAN and cellular data. The back also houses two camera lenses, whereby one of them is just decor and doesn't have an actual function.

At 10.4 inches, the tablet offers an interesting in-between size: It is slightly lighter and more compact than 11-inch tablets but at the same time, it offers slightly more display surface than the Oukitel OT8, for example, with its 10.1-inch screen.

The bezels around the tablet's screen are nicely sized, resulting in it looking modern while still being comfortable to hold without accidentally activating the touchscreen. The tablet is stable and can barely be twisted.

With 256 GB, you get quite a lot of storage and its 8 GB of RAM is generous, too. The vast majority of users should find this enough but if it isn't, you still have the option to activate 8 GB of virtual RAM. This is created as swap files within the significantly slower data memory, so it is unlikely to provide a major advantage.

Internally, the USB-C port is connected via USB-2.0, so it doesn't enable particularly fast data transfers to other devices. If you want to connect external audio devices, then you can do so using the 3.5-mm audio jack situated on one of the corners of the tablet. Unfortunately, it doesn't support NFC for contactless payments. 

The microSD card reader occupies one of the two SIM card slots. In turn, it works quite fast: We measured data rates of 42.5 MByte/s during our copying test. Although our Angelbird V60 reference microSD card's maximum possible data rates were in no way taken advantage of, the Cubot Tab 50 still did a much better job than a lot of similarly priced tablets.

Size comparison

256.8 mm / 10.1 inch 168.3 mm / 6.63 inch 7.8 mm / 0.3071 inch 515 g1.135 lbs255.53 mm / 10.1 inch 167.08 mm / 6.58 inch 7.36 mm / 0.2898 inch 481 g1.06 lbs246.4 mm / 9.7 inch 161.5 mm / 6.36 inch 7.7 mm / 0.3031 inch 455 g1.003 lbs238.4 mm / 9.39 inch 157.7 mm / 6.21 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 435 g0.959 lbs210 mm / 8.27 inch 148 mm / 5.83 inch 1 mm / 0.03937 inch 2.9 g0.00639 lbs
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=61, last 2 years)
31.7 MB/s -25%
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, T606, 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, T606, 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, T606, 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, T606, 128 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø75.2 (41.4-81.8)

Communication, software and operation – Stable WLAN and LTE modem

We measured relatively stable data rates between 300 - 350 MBit/s during our WLAN test. This suggests a WiFi 5 modem and a quick look at the tablet's spec sheet and our system information app was able to confirm this. 

As a result, the tablet is about class-average but it managed very stable and even slightly faster transfer rates than some similarly priced devices. Its signal quality was still okay even when situated far away from the router and with three walls in between—however, pages loaded much slower than when situated right next to the router.

The Cubot Tab 50 can also use cellular data to access the web and make phone calls. This requires a nano-SIM, eSIMs are not supported. Our test device's LTE network variety is limited and is only sufficient for Central Europe, where this test was carried out. So if you want to take this tablet with you on a trip, you should find out exactly whether you can access the internet at your destination.

Android 13 comes pre-installed and has hardly been changed by the manufacturer. At the time of testing, its latest security update was from November 2023, so quite old. The manufacturer hasn't promised any updates, so you should only expect irregular security patches. At least you get very pure Android without any potentially annoying third-party apps.

Its touchscreen isn't super responsive, but it is easy to use. It is also sensitive right in the corners. The Tab 50 doesn't give you the option to unlock it via a fingerprint sensor or facial recognition. This means that this option is also not available for authentication in banking apps, for example.

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 T606, 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 T606, 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)

Cameras – Poor quality

Photo taken using front-facing camera
Photo taken using front-facing camera

There is one single 13-megapixel camera on the back. If required, it is at least supported by an LED flash.

In very low light, the camera unfortunately proved to be a total failure; in normal daylight, the images were only slightly brightened. At the same time, very bright areas were quickly overexposed and only few details were captured.

Of course, you shouldn't expect too much from tablet cameras, but the Tab 50's image quality is really only sufficient for the most essential snapshots in good lighting conditions.

The front-facing camera takes blurry selfies and hardly any details are recognizable in dark areas.

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
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

Display – Noticeable blue tint

Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array

The tablet's screen has a resolution of 2,000 x 1,200 pixels, allowing for clear depiction on its 10.4-inch surface. Its maximum brightness of 308 cd/m² is only sufficient for indoor use; outdoors, reflections from your surroundings quickly hinder your view of image content.

In our measurements using a spectrophotometer and the CalMAN software, we discovered a strong blue tint on its display, which makes colors appear quite cool. Due to its strong color deviations, you shouldn't rely on the screen to display colors realistically.

We didn't notice any PWM flickering—even at low brightness levels.

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 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 9.9 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
94.5% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.306
Cubot Tab 50
IPS, 2000x1200, 10.40
Oukitel OT8
IPS, 1920x1200, 11.00
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
TFT-LCD, 1920x1200, 11.00
Teclast M50 HD
IPS, 1920x1200, 10.10
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. » 33 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21.4 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 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 48 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (33.7 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 17803 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

CalMAN grayscale
CalMAN grayscale
CalMAN color accuracy
CalMAN color accuracy
CalMAN sRGB color space
CalMAN sRGB color space
CalMAN saturation
CalMAN saturation

Performance, emissions and battery life – Power for lots of apps

The Cubot Tab 50 uses the Mediatek Helio G99 as its SoC, which is quite a powerful chip for the price range. It is therefore not surprising that its benchmark scores were significantly higher than those of the comparison devices and that the device offers significantly higher performance when it comes to its processor and when dealing with graphics.

This means that the system can be used quite smoothly, and the UFS 2.2 storage with its good transfer rates also contributes to this.

The tablet's case only heats up to a maximum of 33 °C even under prolonged load and can therefore still be used without any problems. The SoC also isn't throttled under prolonged load, as the 3DMark stress tests revealed.

The Cubot Tab 50 has four speakers and, as a result, achieves a good maximum volume. However, their sound isn't particularly full. Low mids or basses are barely audible, resulting in a rather flat sound.

External audio devices, which can be connected via a 3.5 mm audio jack or Bluetooth, sound much better. All important codecs are available for wireless audio transmission, including hi-res ones such as LDAC and aptX HD.

At 7,500 mAh, its battery is of average capacity. The Cubot Tab 50 managed 14:04 hours in our WLAN test, meaning it can easily be used for a rainy day of entertainment at home. Thanks to its included 18-watt power supply, charging doesn't take forever, but you do have to wait 4 hours for a full charge if the battery was completely empty before.

Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core
Average of class Tablet
  (140 - 1892, n=72, last 2 years)
668 Points +23%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (490 - 576, n=15)
546 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 T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
305 Points -44%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
303 Points -44%
Multi-Core
Average of class Tablet
  (312 - 8524, n=72, last 2 years)
2359 Points +30%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (1670 - 1981, n=15)
1840 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 T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
1260 Points -31%
Teclast M50 HD
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
1191 Points -34%
Geekbench 6.2
Single-Core
Average of class Tablet
  (185 - 3715, n=50, last 2 years)
936 Points +28%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
732 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (710 - 738, n=9)
729 Points 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
413 Points -44%
Teclast M50 HD
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
372 Points -49%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
371 Points -49%
Multi-Core
Average of class Tablet
  (493 - 14690, n=50, last 2 years)
2771 Points +36%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
2040 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (1864 - 2065, n=9)
1997 Points -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1439 Points -29%
Teclast M50 HD
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
1392 Points -32%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
1327 Points -35%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (8973 - 11027, n=15)
9862 Points +3%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
9586 Points
Average of class Tablet
  (3195 - 17267, n=69, last 2 years)
8907 Points -7%
Teclast M50 HD
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
7259 Points -24%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
7068 Points -26%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, 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=14)
2600 Points 0%
Average of class Tablet
  (361 - 14235, n=53, last 2 years)
1986 Points -24%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1441 Points -45%
Teclast M50 HD
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
953 Points -63%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
361 Points -86%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (2326 - 2655, n=14)
2439 Points 0%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
2433 Points
Average of class Tablet
  (290 - 24605, n=53, last 2 years)
2084 Points -14%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1273 Points -48%
Teclast M50 HD
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
809 Points -67%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, 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=14)
3362 Points -2%
Average of class Tablet
  (858 - 5751, n=53, last 2 years)
2784 Points -19%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
2681 Points -22%
Teclast M50 HD
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
2519 Points -26%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
2454 Points -28%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Average of class Tablet
  (267 - 14235, n=64, last 2 years)
3312 Points +26%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (2543 - 2843, n=14)
2648 Points +1%
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 T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
978 Points -63%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
965 Points -63%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Average of class Tablet
  (240 - 24605, n=64, last 2 years)
3994 Points +63%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (2375 - 3908, n=14)
2572 Points +5%
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 T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
829 Points -66%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
819 Points -67%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (3102 - 3798, n=14)
3578 Points 0%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
3561 Points
Average of class Tablet
  (441 - 5751, n=64, last 2 years)
3261 Points -8%
Teclast M50 HD
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
2650 Points -26%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, 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=63, last 2 years)
1608 Points +38%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (1165 - 1364, n=15)
1240 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 T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
425 Points -64%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
423 Points -64%
Wild Life Unlimited Score
Average of class Tablet
  (289 - 31653, n=71, last 2 years)
3392 Points +221%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (1056 - 1340, n=15)
1205 Points +14%
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 T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
421 Points -60%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
419 Points -60%
Wild Life Extreme
Average of class Tablet
  (75 - 7335, n=71, last 2 years)
943 Points +174%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (330 - 378, n=15)
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 T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
99 Points -71%
Teclast M50 HD
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
90 Points -74%
Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Average of class Tablet
  (72 - 8889, n=69, last 2 years)
1131 Points +238%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (323 - 366, n=15)
338 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 T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
101 Points -70%
Teclast M50 HD
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
100 Points -70%
GFXBench
on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Average of class Tablet
  (3 - 120, n=76, last 2 years)
23.6 fps +57%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (12 - 44, n=15)
17.6 fps +17%
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 T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
5.4 fps -64%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
5.1 fps -66%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Average of class Tablet
  (2.5 - 340, n=76, last 2 years)
43.5 fps +172%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
16 fps
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (14 - 18, n=15)
15.7 fps -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
9.8 fps -39%
Teclast M50 HD
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
5.5 fps -66%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
5.4 fps -66%
on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Average of class Tablet
  (1.9 - 106.4, n=76, last 2 years)
16.2 fps +71%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (8.3 - 28, n=15)
11.6 fps +22%
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 T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
3.4 fps -64%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
3.2 fps -66%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Average of class Tablet
  (0.9 - 114.5, n=76, last 2 years)
16 fps +167%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
6 fps
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (5.4 - 6.5, n=15)
5.87 fps -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
3.3 fps -45%
Teclast M50 HD
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
2 fps -67%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
2 fps -67%
3840x2160 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Average of class Tablet
  (0.4 - 55.1, n=74, last 2 years)
7.56 fps +244%
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (2.2 - 2.8, n=15)
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 T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
0.85 fps -61%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 6144
0.84 fps -62%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Average of class Tablet
  (2672 - 105035, n=78, last 2 years)
24224 Points +14%
Cubot Tab 50
Mediatek Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2, 8192
21326 Points
Average Mediatek Helio G99
  (17228 - 25005, n=15)
20509 Points -4%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
14279 Points -33%
Teclast M50 HD
UNISOC T606, Mali-G57 MP1, 8192
12397 Points -42%
Oukitel OT8
UNISOC T606, 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%
0%
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%

Temperature

Max. Load
 30.5 °C
87 F
32.8 °C
91 F
28.2 °C
83 F
 
 29.8 °C
86 F
29.4 °C
85 F
27.4 °C
81 F
 
 30.2 °C
86 F
27.6 °C
82 F
26.5 °C
80 F
 
Maximum: 32.8 °C = 91 F
Average: 29.2 °C = 85 F
29.8 °C
86 F
33 °C
91 F
30.2 °C
86 F
28.7 °C
84 F
30.2 °C
86 F
29.3 °C
85 F
27.8 °C
82 F
28.5 °C
83 F
28.9 °C
84 F
Maximum: 33 °C = 91 F
Average: 29.6 °C = 85 F
Power Supply (max.)  41.9 °C = 107 F | Room Temperature 21 °C = 70 F | 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 34.1 °C / 93 F, ranging from 20.7 to 361 °C for the class Tablet.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 33 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °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.


Heat map front
Heat map front
Heat map back
Heat map back

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, T606, 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, T606, 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, T606, 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, T606, 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)

Speakers

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
» 69% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 23% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 23%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 71% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 23% 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
» 79% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 18% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 23%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 79% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 17% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Runtimes

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=73, last 2 years)
832 min -1%
Teclast M50 HD
6000 mAh
667 min -21%
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing
14h 04min

Pros

+ good performance
+ generous storage
+ LTE modem
+ stable metal case
+ lots of Bluetooth audio codecs
+ fast microSD card reader
+ stable WLAN signal
+ stock Android
+ good runtimes
+ no PWM

Cons

- barely usable cameras
- dim screen...
- ... with a hefty blue tint
- flat speaker sound
- no biometric unlock options

Verdict – Fast and well-equipped, but not perfect

Cubot Tab 50 review. Test device provided by Cubot.
Cubot Tab 50 review. Test device provided by Cubot.

Thanks to its very powerful SoC, the Cubot Tab 50 stands out from the crowd of inexpensive tablets. Its battery life is also decent, its metal case is impressive and its features are right thanks to its large storage and mobile phone support—as a result, the device can be recommended to users who are primarily looking for a fast tablet for little money.

However, those looking for other qualities will also have to accept some disappointments: Its camera, for example, is really only suitable for scanning QR codes or taking pictures in an emergency. Its speakers make little use of the available sound space and only produce rather flat sound. Its security patches are also quite old and you should expect irregular updates. If you would like to secure the data on your tablet biometrically using fingerprints or facial recognition, you will have to look elsewhere, too.

However, there are some things we don't want to leave unmentioned, namely its relatively fast microSD reader, stable WLAN signal and low temperatures. So there is light and shade in the Cubot Tab 50 and you should consider which features are important to you in a tablet before buying.

The Cubot Tab 50 benefits from a fast processor and LTE support. On the other hand, if you are looking for a bright display and usable camera, then you will be a little disappointed.

A quick look at the alternatives: The Teclast M50 HD is just as compact and also features an LTE modem. The Redmi Pad SE features a 90-Hz panel but not nearly as much performance as our test device.

Price and availability

The Cubot Tab 50 should be available to purchase from the manufacturer's Amazon store soon. It will likely retail for around US$200.

Cubot Tab 50 - 03/20/2024 v7
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 present review sample was made available to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or a shop for the purposes of 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.

Pricecompare

static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Expert Reviews and News on Laptops, Smartphones and Tech Innovations > Reviews > Cubot Tab 50 review – The speedy budget tablet with an LTE modem and a Full HD screen
Florian Schmitt, 2024-03-22 (Update: 2024-03-22)