Notebookcheck Logo

Oppo Pad Air tablet review - Good speakers and ample battery

Lightweight and pretty. At over 300 Euros, the Oppo Pad Air is no longer one of the cheapest tablets. In return, it offers a high-quality exterior and fast memory. Our review explains whether it can hold its own against the strong competition.
Oppo Pad Air


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
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 ( = 0.27 x 9.65 x 6.09 in)
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 ( = 15.52 oz / 0.97 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
350 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Possible competitors in comparison

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Height
Size
Resolution
Best Price
83.1 %
01/2023
Oppo Pad Air
SD 680, Adreno 610
440 g6.9 mm10.36"2000x1200
81.2 %
01/2023
Huawei MatePad SE
SD 680, Adreno 610
440 g7.9 mm10.40"2000x1200
81.7 %
11/2022
Honor Pad 8
SD 680, Adreno 610
520 g6.9 mm12.00"2000x1200
84.6 %
12/2022
Xiaomi Redmi Pad
Helio G99, Mali-G57 MP2
445 g7.05 mm10.61"2000x1200
81 %
02/2022
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
T618, Mali-G52 MP2
508 g6.9 mm10.50"1920x1200

Case and features - Slim and light

With the Pad Air, Oppo brings a light tablet with a 10.36-inch screen that is not one of the cheapest devices, but it also looks very chic.

A plastic strip stretches across the back's upper casing edge, which reminds of tree bark or waves due to its pattern. On the one hand, this strip ensures a better first impression, since the rest of the back is made of metal. On the other hand, its glossy effects vary with the rest of the case and are thus a visual highlight.

The tablet is quite light at 440 grams and has a very slim silhouette of only 6.9 millimeters. The rather angular case nevertheless feels good in the hand. The screen's edges are the usual size, so you can hold the tablet without unintentionally triggering commands on the touchscreen.

The stability is good, but the tablet can be pressed in and twisted slightly in some places.

Oppo offers two storage variants of the tablet:

  • 4 GB RAM / 64 GB mass storage: 300 Euros
  • 4 GB RAM / 128 GB mass storage: 350 euro

There is no LTE variant nor an NFC module for mobile payments.

However, the storage can be expanded via the microSD slot. In our benchmarks with the Angelbird V60 reference card, the read rate repeatedly drops, but the reader otherwise offers good transfer rates.

Oppo Pad Air
Oppo Pad Air
Oppo Pad Air
Oppo Pad Air
Oppo Pad Air

Size comparison

278.54 mm / 11 inch 174.06 mm / 6.85 inch 6.9 mm / 0.2717 inch 520 g1.146 lbs250.38 mm / 9.86 inch 157.98 mm / 6.22 inch 7.05 mm / 0.2776 inch 445 g0.981 lbs247 mm / 9.72 inch 156.7 mm / 6.17 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 440 g0.97 lbs246.8 mm / 9.72 inch 161.9 mm / 6.37 inch 6.9 mm / 0.2717 inch 508 g1.12 lbs245.1 mm / 9.65 inch 154.8 mm / 6.09 inch 6.9 mm / 0.2717 inch 440 g0.97 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)
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)

0510152025303540455055606570758085Tooltip
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)

Communication, software and operation - Problems with face recognition

Thanks to WiFi 5, the Oppo Pad Air can surf the WLAN quite quickly. However, in our test with the reference router Asus ROG Rapture AXE11000, we noticed that the tablet is a bit slower than the competition at receiving direction, while there are fewer problems with the transmission.

The WLAN module's reception is perfect near the router, and it still has a signal strength of 50% at a distance of 10 meters and through 3 walls. Internet pages also loaded quite quickly there, so you do not have to install WLAN repeaters everywhere in the house for the Pad Air.

Oppo's ColorOS 12.1 is based on Android 12. The tablet is still reasonably up-to-date with security patches from December 2022 at the time of testing. Oppo has promised updates for a long time, but only for certain models. It remains to be seen how long the Pad Air will be updated. At least an update to Android 13 is planned for the first half of 2013.

The touchscreen is very reactive thanks to 120 Hz and can be used precisely up to the corners.

The tablet does not have a fingerprint sensor for biometric unlocking. However, facial recognition can be used. This does not work very well. You have to bring your face quite close to the tablet but it is not recognized reliably even then. The method is also not very secure due to the lack of additional hardware.

Networking
iperf3 receive AXE11000
Xiaomi Redmi Pad
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
367 (358min - 370max) MBit/s +20%
Honor Pad 8
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
345 (326min - 357max) MBit/s +13%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
325 (163min - 328max) MBit/s +6%
Huawei MatePad SE
Adreno 610, SD 680, 64 GB eMMC Flash
310 (284min - 330max) MBit/s +1%
Oppo Pad Air
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
306 (289min - 326max) MBit/s
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
Xiaomi Redmi Pad
Mali-G57 MP2, Helio G99, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
369 (179min - 379max) MBit/s +3%
Huawei MatePad SE
Adreno 610, SD 680, 64 GB eMMC Flash
365 (352min - 379max) MBit/s +2%
Honor Pad 8
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
357 (323min - 366max) MBit/s 0%
Oppo Pad Air
Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
357 (257min - 376max) MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
Mali-G52 MP2, T618, 32 GB eMMC Flash
349 (178min - 357max) MBit/s -2%
020406080100120140160180200220240260280300320340360Tooltip
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)

Cameras - You can take photos...

Photo from the front camera
Photo from the front camera

Like most tablets, the camera equipment is rather simple. An 8-megapixel sensor from Hynix is found on the back. It takes somewhat dim and not very detailed photos, which are also conspicuous by a lack of dynamics in dark or very bright areas. In the enlargement, the picture quality is poor because of the uneven protective glass of the lens.

In very low light and high contrasts, the result is also rather mediocre; at least you can recognize something in the picture. However, many areas look very pixelated and the dynamics also leave a lot to be desired.

Videos can be recorded in 1080p and 30 fps at most. The autofocus works with delays here, and colors are also lost in less light.

The front-facing camera has a resolution of 5 megapixels. It takes usable selfies in good light, but it shows how coarse the details are displayed when zoomed in. There is also a lack of detail 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 cameraMain cameraLow Light
click to load images
ColorChecker
19.1 ∆E
13.2 ∆E
17.4 ∆E
18.9 ∆E
14.2 ∆E
9.3 ∆E
13.2 ∆E
17.2 ∆E
13.3 ∆E
10.6 ∆E
9.8 ∆E
10.5 ∆E
12 ∆E
13.8 ∆E
11 ∆E
6.5 ∆E
13 ∆E
14.6 ∆E
2.5 ∆E
6.8 ∆E
11.9 ∆E
15.1 ∆E
10.9 ∆E
4.8 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo Pad Air: 12.06 ∆E min: 2.47 - max: 19.13 ∆E
ColorChecker
29 ∆E
53.4 ∆E
39.1 ∆E
35.9 ∆E
44.7 ∆E
62.9 ∆E
52.9 ∆E
34.7 ∆E
42.5 ∆E
27.6 ∆E
65.4 ∆E
63.5 ∆E
30.7 ∆E
48.1 ∆E
36 ∆E
76.1 ∆E
43.1 ∆E
43.6 ∆E
88.4 ∆E
69.8 ∆E
51.5 ∆E
36.5 ∆E
23.3 ∆E
12.9 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo Pad Air: 46.32 ∆E min: 12.89 - max: 88.38 ∆E

Display - Different brightness

Subpixel structure
Subpixel structure

Oppo specifies 360 nits as the maximum brightness for the display of the Pad Air. Our measurements are slightly below that and the Oppo Pad Air is also the tablet with the darkest screen in the comparison field. The brightness is sufficient for use in the living room, but you will quickly have problems with reflections outdoors.

In return, the panel has a maximum frame rate of 120 Hz, which none of the rivals can claim. Thus, scrolling is smoother and the tablet's reactivity is also higher.

The contrast is on a rather low level, and bright colors should not be expected from the Oppo Pad Air's display. A bluish cast in bright grayscales is also visible to the naked eye in the detailed measurements. Especially bright orange tones deviate strongly from the optimum of the color space.

We did not detect PWM in the display in our measurements.

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 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 5.5 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
97.9% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.118
Oppo Pad Air
IPS, 2000x1200, 10.36
Huawei MatePad SE
IPS, 2000x1200, 10.40
Honor Pad 8
IPS, 2000x1200, 12.00
Xiaomi Redmi Pad
IPS, 2000x1200, 10.61
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
TFT-LCD, 1920x1200, 10.50
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)

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 18180 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.


CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN color accuracy
CalMAN color accuracy
CalMAN color space sRGB
CalMAN color space sRGB
CalMAN saturation
CalMAN saturation

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
25.7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 14.4 ms rise
↘ 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. » 57 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
42.7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 23.7 ms rise
↘ 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 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 66 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (34 ms).

Performance, emissions and battery life - Good runtimes

With the Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 oppo has chosen an SoC that is often used for less expensive tablets: for example Huawei MatePad SE or the Honor Pad 8.

It offers enough performance for a mostly smooth system operation, but you should not expect higher demands and multitasking could also be a problem depending on the apps used. Xiaomi's Redmi Pad offers considerably more power.

Despite the 120 Hz screen, demanding gamers will probably have to look elsewhere; the SoC's power is not sufficient for high settings in many mobile games.

Oppo can score with the memory: the manufacturer installs UFS 2.2 flash instead of the slow eMMC and thus relegates the tablets from Huawei and Samsung to the ranks. This shortens loading times and speeds up data transfers.

We noticed that the tablet hardly warms up even under longer load in the temperature measurements. Furthermore, the SoC retains its performance even after numerous benchmark runs.

We like the speaker's sound, which does not overdrive and also integrates lower mids. Those who still prefer to connect headphones or external speakers can do so via USB-C or Bluetooth. Wireless codecs are aptX, aptX HD, SBC, AAC, and LDAC.

In terms of battery life, the light tablet convinces with its quite high-capacity battery, which enables a battery life of 13:43 hours in our WLAN test. The Xiaomi Redmi Pad can still go one better, but the Oppo Pad Air is overall very suitable for everyday use and will definitely survive a day of intensive use without being plugged in.

If you do have to charge it, you can do so with up to 18 watts. The battery needs about 3 hours until it is fully charged again.

Geekbench 5.5 / Single-Core
Average of class Tablet (140 - 1892, n=64, last 2 years)
678 Points +78%
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 - 384, n=14)
373 Points -2%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
365 Points -4%
Geekbench 5.5 / Multi-Core
Average of class Tablet (312 - 8524, n=64, last 2 years)
2429 Points +49%
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=14)
1580 Points -3%
Honor Pad 8
1522 Points -6%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
1229 Points -24%
PCMark for Android / Work 3.0
Xiaomi Redmi Pad
9475 Points +48%
Average of class Tablet (3195 - 17267, n=60, last 2 years)
8491 Points +32%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
7447 Points +16%
Honor Pad 8
6655 Points +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (4535 - 8730, n=14)
6497 Points +1%
Oppo Pad Air
6423 Points
Huawei MatePad SE
5432 Points -15%
3DMark / Wild Life Score
Average of class Tablet (286 - 10018, n=56, last 2 years)
1699 Points +276%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad
1237 Points +174%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
712 Points +58%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (437 - 589, n=14)
461 Points +2%
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 - 25317, n=62, last 2 years)
3203 Points +617%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad
1215 Points +172%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
708 Points +58%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (417 - 574, n=14)
448 Points 0%
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 - 6919, n=62, last 2 years)
915 Points +638%
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=15)
115.6 Points -7%
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Average of class Tablet (72 - 6909, n=60, last 2 years)
960 Points +668%
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=13)
122.4 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 - 14235, n=56, last 2 years)
3123 Points +130%
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 - 1429, n=14)
1264 Points -7%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Average of class Tablet (240 - 24605, n=56, last 2 years)
3719 Points +214%
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 - 1309, n=14)
1130 Points -5%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Xiaomi Redmi Pad
3717 Points +32%
Average of class Tablet (441 - 5751, n=56, last 2 years)
3187 Points +14%
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=14)
2386 Points -15%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited
Xiaomi Redmi Pad
2452 Points +89%
Average of class Tablet (615 - 4741, n=47, last 2 years)
1696 Points +31%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
1488 Points +15%
Oppo Pad Air
1297 Points
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (1234 - 1406, n=13)
1291 Points 0%
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 - 5731, n=47, last 2 years)
1663 Points +46%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
1340 Points +18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (1087 - 1276, n=13)
1143 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 (1671 - 3199, n=47, last 2 years)
2470 Points -4%
Huawei MatePad SE
2458 Points -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (2185 - 2576, n=13)
2447 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=48, last 2 years)
1971 Points +47%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
1425 Points +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (1231 - 1441, n=13)
1342 Points 0%
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=48, last 2 years)
2086 Points +80%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
1252 Points +8%
Honor Pad 8
1174 Points +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (1077 - 1273, n=13)
1170 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
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
2768 Points -2%
Average of class Tablet (858 - 5751, n=48, last 2 years)
2755 Points -3%
Huawei MatePad SE
2754 Points -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (2301 - 2930, n=13)
2708 Points -4%
Honor Pad 8
2679 Points -5%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Average of class Tablet (2.5 - 279, n=66, last 2 years)
37.5 fps +287%
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=14)
9.08 fps -6%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Average of class Tablet (3 - 111, n=66, last 2 years)
21.2 fps +138%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad
12 fps +35%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
9.9 fps +11%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (4.6 - 17, n=14)
9.51 fps +7%
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 - 90, n=66, last 2 years)
14 fps +338%
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=14)
3.07 fps -4%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Average of class Tablet (1.9 - 97.3, n=66, last 2 years)
14.8 fps +179%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad
8.4 fps +58%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
6 fps +13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (2.7 - 11, n=14)
5.65 fps +7%
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 - 48, n=63, last 2 years)
6.29 fps +349%
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=9)
1.4 fps 0%
Octane V2 / Total Score
Average of class Tablet (2672 - 74614, n=68, last 2 years)
23080 Points +86%
Xiaomi Redmi Pad
17557 Points +42%
Honor Pad 8
13831 Points +12%
Oppo Pad Air
12402 Points
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G (6358 - 14279, n=11)
11432 Points -8%
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
Oppo Pad AirHuawei MatePad SEHonor Pad 8Xiaomi Redmi PadSamsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022Average 128 GB UFS 2.2 FlashAverage of class Tablet
AndroBench 3-5
-72%
1%
30%
-72%
-10%
-14%
Sequential Read 256KB
921.6
293.6
-68%
833.56
-10%
976.9
6%
255.1
-72%
708 ?(303 - 1038, n=59)
-23%
836 ?(163 - 3414, n=63, last 2 years)
-9%
Sequential Write 256KB
717
99.5
-86%
708.51
-1%
883.6
23%
101.1
-86%
517 ?(105.3 - 903, n=59)
-28%
530 ?(78.2 - 2528, n=63, last 2 years)
-26%
Random Read 4KB
177.1
61.8
-65%
189.57
7%
250.82
42%
68.3
-61%
187.1 ?(89.3 - 297, n=59)
6%
164.2 ?(18.4 - 451, n=63, last 2 years)
-7%
Random Write 4KB
172.8
54
-69%
186.95
8%
257.02
49%
57.5
-67%
181 ?(68.8 - 419, n=59)
5%
148.8 ?(8.23 - 503, n=63, last 2 years)
-14%

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

01234567Tooltip
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
 30.7 °C
87 F
31.7 °C
89 F
23.7 °C
75 F
 
 29 °C
84 F
27.2 °C
81 F
23.4 °C
74 F
 
 27.2 °C
81 F
24.3 °C
76 F
22.7 °C
73 F
 
Maximum: 31.7 °C = 89 F
Average: 26.7 °C = 80 F
23.8 °C
75 F
27.6 °C
82 F
28 °C
82 F
23.5 °C
74 F
25.8 °C
78 F
27 °C
81 F
23.3 °C
74 F
24.9 °C
77 F
25.9 °C
79 F
Maximum: 28 °C = 82 F
Average: 25.5 °C = 78 F
Power Supply (max.)  42.3 °C = 108 F | Room Temperature 20.3 °C = 69 F | 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 33.8 °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 33.3 °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.
Heatmap Front
Heatmap Front
Heatmap Back side
Heatmap Back side
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2033.131.82532.635.23127.428.74030.5315034.135.46329.428.88019.920.91002224.312522.932.216014.2432001144.525011.750.43158.553.94008.960.35009.46463010.165.380016.567.810001474.8125015.472.9160010.571.7200010.772.3250011.369.8315011.967.7400012.962.5500013.563.9630014.264.580001560.71000015.763.11250016.461.21600017.347.8SPL25.581.3N0.747.6median 13.5median 63.1Delta2.79.635.228.921.72018.622.421.720.43233.625.724.527.419.624.318.316.326.518.944.817.547.812.352.715.758.911.660.311.869.712.472.111.671.412.577.213.176.712.576.213.172.212.870.312.868.512.976.313.379.413.480.313.774.613.768.814.463.613.751.725.287.40.771.6median 13.1median 70.31.511.2hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseOppo Pad AirSamsung Galaxy Tab A8 2022
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
» 50% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 44% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 23%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 45% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 47% 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
» 50% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 44% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 23%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 45% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 47% 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

+ 120 Hz screen without PWM
+ quite light
+ chic case
+ good runtimes
+ fast memory
+ full speaker sound

Cons

- comparatively expensive
- cumbersome face recognition
- poor camera quality
- screen with little luminosity

Verdict - If you can afford it, you will get a good tablet

In review: Oppo Pad Air.
In review: Oppo Pad Air.

The Oppo Pad Air is not quite as cheap, but it offers a very chic and light casing, a large battery, which enables long runtimes, and fast memory.

The dark screen shows that the Oppo Pad Air's preferred field of use is indoors. Accordingly, the cameras are more suitable for scanning something or making a visual note than for great nature shots.

A special feature of the tablet is its fast 120 Hz screen, which enables very smooth scrolling and also manages without PWM.

What you should not rely on too much is face recognition: it works more unreliably and awkwardly than on other tablets.

The Oppo Pad Air is a not-so-cheap tablet with a 120 Hz screen, good speakers, and long runtimes.

The Huawei MatePad SE offers the same SoC for considerably less money, but you have to live with the peculiarities of its operating system. Samsung's Galaxy Tab A8 also offers LTE on request, but the battery does not last as long.

Price and availability

Oppo does not sell the tablet via its own website in Germany at the moment due to a patent dispute.

However, you can get it from amazon.de: the version with 64 GB of mass storage costs about 271 Euros at the time of testing, and amazon.de offers the tablet for 314 Euros with 128 GB.

Oppo Pad Air - 01/25/2023 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
83 / 98 → 85%
Keyboard
65%
Pointing Device
96 / 40-88 → 100%
Connectivity
37%
Weight
84%
Battery
90 / 92 → 98%
Display
81%
Games Performance
16%
Application Performance
57 / 91 → 63%
Temperature
97%
Noise
100%
Audio
80%
Camera
42%
Average
71%
83%
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

Read all 1 comments / answer
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 > Oppo Pad Air tablet review - Good speakers and ample battery
Florian Schmitt, 2023-01-26 (Update: 2023-01-26)