Notebookcheck

Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 (2019) Tablet Review

Daniel Schmidt, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, T. Hinum (translated by Alex Alderson), 05/31/2019

Rejuvenation - It has been over two years since Samsung last upgraded its 10-inch entry-level Galaxy Tab A tablet. An update was necessary, especially regarding software. Read on to find out how the Galaxy Tab A 10.1 performs in our tests and whether it is a worthwhile upgrade over the Galaxy Tab A 10.5.

The Tab A 10.1, specifically the SM-T510, succeeds the Tab A 10.1 (2016). The two tablets have the same screen size, but Samsung has changed a lot in three years. The new Tab A 10.1 sports a redesigned chassis and includes slimmer display bezels. The South Korean company has dispensed with the home button too and has included a newer SoC that it promises should provide better performance and improved efficiencies. The company has also doubled the internal storage from 16 GB to 32 GB, although this remains eMMC rather than the faster UFS 2.1 that we have seen in some premium smartphones and tablets. There is still 2 GB of RAM, but this has been upgraded to LPDDR4. USB Type-C replaces micro-USB too, but there is still a headphone jack, which is fast becoming a relic.

In short, the Tab A 10.1 offers only minor upgrades over its three-year-old predecessor, but it is in keeping with a tablet that retails for 219 Euros (~$244). Samsung also sells an LTE variant, which costs an additional 50 Euros (~$56). By comparison, the Wi-Fi version of the Tab A 10.1 (2016) launched at 349 Euros (~$389); it is now much cheaper though.

We have chosen to compare the Tab A 10.1 against its predecessor along with other budget and midrange tablets. These will include the Amazon Fire HD 10, Apple iPad 6 2018, Huawei MediaPad M5 Lite and the Lenovo Tab M10. We shall also consider our review unit against the Galaxy Tab A 10.5 and the Galaxy Tab S5e.

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team! Especially English native speakers welcome!

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019 (Galaxy Tab A Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
2048 MB 
, LPDDR4
Display
10.1 inch 16:10, 1920 x 1200 pixel 224 PPI, Capacitive multi-touch touchscreen, TFT-LCD, Corning Gorilla Glas 3, glossy: yes
Storage
32 GB eMMC Flash, 32 GB 
, 23.6 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm headphone jack, Card Reader: up to 512 GB microSD cards - FAT, FAT32 & exFAT file systems supported, Sensors: Accelerometer, proximity sensor, USB Type-C
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.0, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.5 x 245.2 x 149.4 ( = 0.3 x 9.65 x 5.88 in)
Battery
6150 mAh Lithium-Ion
Operating System
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 8 MPix (CMOS, f/1.9, 1/4.0", autofocus, Full HD video)
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix (CMOS, f/2.2, 1/5.0", fixed focus, Full HD video)
Additional features
Speakers: Stereo speakers, Keyboard: Virtual, One UI 1.1, Microsoft Office, OneDrive, Galaxy Apps, Spotify, 24 Months Warranty, fanless
Weight
460 g ( = 16.23 oz / 1.01 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
219 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

The Tab A 10.1 comes in three colours

Samsung currently sells the Tab A 10.1 in three colours: black, gold, and silver. Our review sample is the black model for reference. The tablet is pleasantly thin at 7.5 mm, although the pricier Galaxy Tab S5e is thinner still at 5.5 mm. The rear-facing camera protrudes by about 1 mm, so technically the Tab A 10.1 is 8.5 mm thick. However, this does not cause the tablet to rock about on a flat surface, so we did not notice this extra depth in daily use. The Tab A 10.1 weighs just 460 g, making it lighter than all our comparison devices.

We also like the build quality of our review unit and Samsung’s choice of materials. The back is mostly made from an unspecified metal, with a top strip being made from plastic, which houses the camera and antennae. Samsung has covered the display in Corning Gorilla Glass 3 and has added a plastic lip for added scratch protection. Overall, most of the gaps between materials are evenly tight. Some gaps between the display frame and metal chassis do not look as true as other areas; we hardly noticed this in daily use though.

The Tab A 10.1 is surprisingly sturdy too. We can only get the display to temporarily deform if we press hard, and we cannot bend or twist the tablet easily either. The tablet has a rather wide plastic card slot, but this does not reduce its overall rigidity. The slot in our review unit only houses a microSD card, but the LTE version also takes a nano-SIM card. Please keep in mind that the tablet has no IP or MIL-STD certification. Hence, it is not dust or water-resistant.

Size Comparison

262 mm / 10.3 inch 159 mm / 6.26 inch 9.8 mm / 0.3858 inch 497 g1.096 lbs260 mm / 10.2 inch 161.1 mm / 6.34 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 531 g1.171 lbs254.2 mm / 10 inch 155.3 mm / 6.11 inch 8.2 mm / 0.3228 inch 525 g1.157 lbs245.2 mm / 9.65 inch 149.4 mm / 5.88 inch 7.5 mm / 0.2953 inch 460 g1.014 lbs243.4 mm / 9.58 inch 162.2 mm / 6.39 inch 7.7 mm / 0.3031 inch 475 g1.047 lbs242 mm / 9.53 inch 168 mm / 6.61 inch 8.1 mm / 0.3189 inch 480 g1.058 lbs240 mm / 9.45 inch 169.5 mm / 6.67 inch 7.5 mm / 0.2953 inch 469 g1.034 lbs

Connectivity

The Tab A 10.1 has 32 GB of eMMC flash storage, but this can be expanded with a microSD card if you need more space. Our review unit supports all modern file systems, but it cannot store apps or data on expandable storage by default. You can enable this feature in Developer Options, which you must also unhide by pressing the build number within Settings several times. We were never able to format our reference microSD cards as internal storage though.

The tablet also has a USB 2.0 Type-C port, to which you can connect peripherals like a keyboard and mouse thanks to USB On-The-Go (OTG) support. The Type-C port can also be used to output audio, although there is a 3.5 mm headphone jack for that purpose too.

The Tab A 10.1 also has Bluetooth 5.0. It does not have an NFC chip though, so you cannot use it with services like Google Pay.

Top: headphone jack
Top: headphone jack
Left-hand side: no connections
Left-hand side: no connections
Right-hand side: power button, volume rocker, card slot
Right-hand side: power button, volume rocker, card slot
Bottom: speaker, USB Type-C, speaker
Bottom: speaker, USB Type-C, speaker

Software

The Tab A 10.1 ships with One UI 1.0, which is Samsung’s customised version of Android 9.0 Pie. Our review unit had March 1, 2019 security patches installed at the time of testing, which were about two months old by that point. We expect Samsung to issue security patches every three to six months, but not at regular intervals. The company should also roll out a system update based on Android 10.0 Q too at some point.

One selling point of the Tab A 10.1 is Kids Home, which allows parents to limit what apps their children can see and access. The mode can be activated quickly and easily via the quick-start menu. Parents can protect Kids Home with a PIN to prevent children from accessing the regular launcher and selection of apps. You can also set up multiple profiles and manage them separately. You must input the parent PIN when switching between child profiles though. Likewise, only parents can install apps and games.

Kids Home also has a redesigned Settings menu that displays screen-on times. You can set limits for weekdays and weekends and see how long your children have been spending on each app you have installed. Samsung has redesigned the camera app to make it easier to use too. The app has an easy-to-use 3.9x digital zoom, while Samsung allows you to view photos taken in Kids Home in both the usual gallery and the Kids Home gallery, giving parents a greater oversight of what their children are photographing.

In short, we think that Kids Home is aimed at children under the age of 10. We would recommend using a combination of Digital Wellbeing and Google Family Link for older children though. You can also set up multiple user accounts outside of Kids Home.

Our review unit has plenty of Google and Samsung apps installed along with Spotify and some Microsoft apps. We were able to uninstall Spotify but only disable the Microsoft apps. It is rather cheap of Samsung to preinstall so many apps but only include 32 GB of storage, especially considering that the company has designed the Tab A 10.1 with the intention of multiple people using it.

Default home screen
Default home screen
Preinstalled apps
Preinstalled apps
Quick Settings
Quick Settings
Kids Home
Kids Home
Kids Home – Default home screen
Kids Home – Default home screen
Kids Home – Lego partner site
Kids Home – Lego partner site
Kids Home – Settings
Kids Home – Settings
Kids Home – Settings
Kids Home – Settings
Kids Home – Default camera app
Kids Home – Default camera app

Communication & GPS

The Tab A 10.1 supports Wi-Fi 5 connectivity and has a SAR body rating of 0.555 W/kg. By contrast, the LTE variant has a higher rating of 1.36 W/kg and utilises LTE Cat. 6 for up to 300 Mb/s download speeds along with 50 Mb/s upload speeds. The LTE model also supports eight LTE bands and can connect to 2G or 3G networks should you need to do so.

Our review unit achieved respectable Wi-Fi transfer speeds in our iperf3 Client tests with our Linksys EA8500 reference router. The Tab A 10.1 averaged around 295 Mb/s across both tests, which puts it ahead of all but the iPad 6 2018 of our comparison devices overall.

We should point out that we occasionally noticed some signal drop-outs during our tests. This should not cause any issues in daily use, but we would recommend not straying too far from a router if possible, as you may experience connection issues if you do.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
570 MBit/s ∼100% +91%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
Mali-G71 MP2, 7904, 32 GB eMMC Flash
298 (min: 239, max: 314) MBit/s ∼52%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
PowerVR GX6250, MT8173, 64 GB eMMC Flash
241 MBit/s ∼42% -19%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
Adreno 506, 450, 32 GB eMMC Flash
216 (min: 49, max: 250) MBit/s ∼38% -28%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
Mali-T830 MP2, Kirin 659, 32 GB eMMC Flash
51.7 MBit/s ∼9% -83%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
500 MBit/s ∼100% +72%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
Adreno 506, 450, 32 GB eMMC Flash
312 (min: 291, max: 325) MBit/s ∼62% +8%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
Mali-G71 MP2, 7904, 32 GB eMMC Flash
290 (min: 274, max: 309) MBit/s ∼58%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
PowerVR GX6250, MT8173, 64 GB eMMC Flash
227 MBit/s ∼45% -22%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
Mali-T830 MP2, Kirin 659, 32 GB eMMC Flash
54.5 MBit/s ∼11% -81%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø297 (239-314)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø290 (274-309)
GPS Test: GNSS
GPS Test: GNSS
GPS Test: Outdoors
GPS Test: Outdoors
GPS Test: Inside
GPS Test: Inside

The Tab A 10.1 uses BeiDou, GLONASS and GPS for location services, which allow our test device to achieve a satellite fix with up to six metres accuracy outside and eight metres accuracy inside. The tablet takes a while to find a sat fix indoors though.

We also took our review unit on a short bike ride to test its location accuracy against our Garmin Edge 500 bike computer. The two devices plotted an almost identical route and deviated by just 10 metres over a 9.21 km route. The Tab A 10.1 occasionally plotted a more accurate route than the Garmin too, although the latter mapped a truer route around the lake, for instance. Overall, the Tab A 10.1 is accurate enough for all general navigation tasks and even more complex ones.

GPS Test: Garmin Edge 500 - Overview
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 500 - Overview
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 500 – Cycling around a lake
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 500 – Cycling around a lake
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 500 - Loop
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 500 - Loop
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 (2019) - Overview
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 (2019) - Overview
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 (2019) – Cycling around a lake
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 (2019) – Cycling around a lake
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 (2019) - Loop
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 (2019) - Loop

Cameras

Taking a selfie with the Galaxy Tab A 10.1
Taking a selfie with the Galaxy Tab A 10.1

The Tab A 10.1 has a 5 MP front-facing camera, which can take decent photos in good lighting conditions. Its narrow f/2.2 aperture and comparatively small sensor mean that it struggles in low-light conditions though. The sensor can also record videos in up to 1080p, but you will need a steady hand as there is no image stabilisation.

The tablet has an 8 MP rear-facing camera too. The sensor is slightly larger than the front-facing one and has an f/1.9 aperture. Correspondingly, it should take better shots in low light, but we would still recommend using it in good lighting conditions, as demonstrated by the noisy low-light results in scene 3. Overall, pictures photographed with the rear-facing sensor are pleasing, and dynamics are surprisingly good. Most shots have blurry details on close inspection, but there are no such issues when taking macro photos. It is a shame that Samsung decided against including an LED flash though, as it would have prevented low-light photos from always looking like a blurry and underexposed mess.

The rear-facing camera can also record videos in up to 1080p and has no form of image stabilisation. Overall, videos look about as good as photos.

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.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
ColorChecker Passport: The lower half of each area of colour displays the reference colour
ColorChecker Passport: The lower half of each area of colour displays the reference colour

We also subjected our review unit to further camera tests under controlled lighting conditions. The rear-facing camera reproduces most colours too brightly compared to ColorChecker Passport reference colours, but black looks almost perfect.

The sensor does a decent job at capturing our test chart, although there are deficiencies. The middle of the chart does not look as sharp as it should, and the details are a bit muddy. Moreover, contrast levels drop off sharply in the lower corners of the image. Overall, the photo looks acceptable considering that it has been taken with a budget tablet. Less said about our attempts to photograph our test chart at 1 lux though; the resulting photo is woeful.

A photo of our test chart
A photo of our test chart
Our test chart in detail
A photo of our test chart taken in the dark

Accessories & Warranty

A look at the included charger and USB Type-A to Type-C cable
A look at the included charger and USB Type-A to Type-C cable

Samsung includes a modular charger (5 V/ 1.55 A), USB Type-A to Type-C cable, a quick-start guide along with the usual selection of warranty and safety leaflets. It is worth pointing out that our review unit came with an 80 cm USB cable, which is disappointingly short. On the plus side, the box contained no plastic save for the wrapper in which the box was encased.

Samsung only currently sells a Book Cover as an optional accessory for the Tab A 10.1, which retails for around 60 Euros (~$67). The company sells endless generic accessories too.

The tablet also comes with 24 months warranty. Samsung does not sell any Care+ services for the Tab A 10.1 though. Please see our Guarantees, Return Policies & Warranties FAQ for country-specific information.

Input Devices & Operation

The Tab A 10.1 has a 10-point multitouch touchscreen, which worked perfectly during our tests. The Gorilla Glass 3 has a smooth finish that is conducive to perform multi-finger gestures like pinch to zoom. It is a fingerprint magnet though.

Samsung preinstalls its in-house keyboard as the default. The keyboard worked just as well as it does on other Samsung devices running One UI that we have already tested, like the Galaxy Tab S5e or the Galaxy S10. You can install other keyboard apps if you wish, like those downloadable from the Galaxy or Google Play stores.

The physical buttons on our review unit have some play to them and can easily be moved back and forth within their housings. Their pressure points should be a bit crisper in our opinion, but we had no major issues with the keys in daily use.

The Tab A 10.1 does not have any special biometric security features like facial or fingerprint authentication. You can secure the device with a password, pattern or PIN though.

Using the default keyboard in landscape mode
Using the default keyboard in landscape mode
Using the default keyboard in portrait mode
Using the default keyboard in portrait mode

Display

Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array

The Tab A 10.1 has a 10.1-inch LCD panel that operates natively at 1920x1200 in a 16:10 aspect ratio. Anyone expecting an identical display to the one that Samsung used in its predecessor will be disappointed. Our review unit achieved an average maximum brightness of 396 cd/m², which falls short of all but the Lenovo Tab M10 of our comparison devices. Moreover, the Tab A 10.1 (2016) gets 31% brighter than its successor and is 6% more evenly lit too. The more practical APL 50 test records an average maximum brightness of 414 cd/m² for the new Tab A 10.1, but it is still underwhelmingly low, nonetheless.

Our review unit has a lower black value than its predecessor, which we measure at 0.5 cd/m². This helps the Tab A 10.1 achieve an 802:1 contrast ratio, which is slightly higher than what the Tab A 10.1 (2016) managed in the same tests. However, both are comparatively mediocre, with our review unit being well beaten by many of our other comparison devices.

Likewise, it is a shame that Samsung failed to include a reader, or eye-protection mode as the display can dim to 2.16 cd/m², making it ideal for reading at night or as an eBook replacement. Unfortunately, the night mode incorporated in One UI only replaces light areas with dark ones and does not reduce the blue light that the display emits.

Fortunately, the tablet does not use pulse-width modulation (PWM) to regulate its display brightness. However, the display does flicker at 60 Hz according to our oscilloscope, so this may still cause issues for some people.

404
cd/m²
383
cd/m²
367
cd/m²
428
cd/m²
401
cd/m²
379
cd/m²
414
cd/m²
397
cd/m²
388
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 428 cd/m² Average: 395.7 cd/m² Minimum: 2.06 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 86 %
Center on Battery: 401 cd/m²
Contrast: 802:1 (Black: 0.5 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.9 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 4.1 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
96.2% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.36
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
TFT-LCD, 1920x1200, 10.1
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
TFT, 1920x1200, 10.1
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
IPS, 1920x1200, 10.1
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
IPS, 1920x1200, 10.1
Lenovo Tab M10
IPS, 1920x1200, 10.1
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
IPS, 1920x1200, 10.5
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
Super AMOLED, 2560x1600, 10.5
Apple iPad 6 2018
IPS, 2048x1536, 9.7
Screen
-5%
-5%
-37%
-41%
35%
25%
29%
Brightness middle
401
542
35%
426
6%
514
28%
339
-15%
556
39%
452
13%
530
32%
Brightness
396
520
31%
399
1%
492
24%
327
-17%
514
30%
453
14%
513
30%
Brightness Distribution
86
91
6%
91
6%
80
-7%
86
0%
87
1%
90
5%
92
7%
Black Level *
0.5
0.68
-36%
0.38
24%
0.96
-92%
0.42
16%
0.42
16%
0.61
-22%
Contrast
802
797
-1%
1121
40%
535
-33%
807
1%
1324
65%
869
8%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
2.9
4.2
-45%
4.5
-55%
5.42
-87%
5.8
-100%
1.8
38%
1.7
41%
1.2
59%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
5.8
6.7
-16%
7.9
-36%
9.84
-70%
11.6
-100%
3.2
45%
3.7
36%
3.2
45%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4.1
4.8
-17%
5.2
-27%
6.5
-59%
8.6
-110%
2.2
46%
2.4
41%
1
76%
Gamma
2.36 93%
2.42 91%
2.23 99%
2.216 99%
2.16 102%
2.26 97%
2.07 106%
2.28 96%
CCT
7263 89%
7434 87%
6875 95%
6780 96%
8718 75%
6819 95%
6337 103%
6588 99%

* ... 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: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9352 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

We also tested our review unit with a photo spectrometer and CalMAN analysis software, which determined that Samsung has done a good job at improving colour accuracy between generations. The Tab A 10.1 outperforms most of our comparison devices too.

Grey tones have a slight cyan tint to them, but we did not notice this in daily use. Overall, our review unit reproduces colours well, especially for a device with an LCD panel.

CalMAN: Grayscale – sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Grayscale – sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Mixed colours – sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Mixed colours – sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Space – AdobeRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Space – AdobeRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Saturation – sRGB target colour space
CalMAN: Colour Saturation – sRGB target colour space

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
31.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 13.6 ms rise
↘ 18 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 81 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (24.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
52.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 26.8 ms rise
↘ 26 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 87 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (39.7 ms).

We found the Tab A 10.1 surprisingly easy to use outdoors. However, we would recommend using it in the shade where possible because the display has a highly reflective finish, which can make it looked washed-out in bright sunlight.

Using the Galaxy Tab A 10.1 outside in the sun with outdoor mode activated
Using the Galaxy Tab A 10.1 outside in the sun with outdoor mode activated
Using the Galaxy Tab A 10.1 in the shade at full display brightness
Using the Galaxy Tab A 10.1 in the shade at full display brightness

The Tab A 10.1 has decent viewing angles considering that it has an LCD panel. Brightness drops off at acute viewing angles, and there is a slight glow effect at certain angles. However, there are no colour distortions, so the Tab A 10.1 should remain readable from practically any angle.

Viewing angles
Viewing angles

Performance

Samsung has equipped the Tab A 10.1 with an in-house Exynos 7904 SoC, a 14 nm chip that has two Cortex-A73 cores and six Cortex-A53 cores. The two performance cores clock up to 1.8 GHz, while the power-saving cores peak at 1.6 GHz. The SoC also has an ARM Mali-G71 MP2 GPU onboard, which we shall cover in greater detail in the Games section of this review. The 2 GB of LPDDR4 RAM with which Samsung equips the Tab A 10.1 is rather paltry for a multimedia tablet running Android 9.0 Pie in our opinion.

Surprisingly, our review unit does not put much space between it and its predecessor in CPU benchmarks. While the Exynos 7904 outperforms the Exynos 7870 in single-core benchmarks, the latter scores 10% more in some multi-core benchmarks like Geekbench 3. The gap is tight in 3DMark physics benchmarks too. Overall, the Exynos 7904 has a more powerful GPU than the Exynos 7870, which helps it excel in some benchmarks. Our review unit manages to outperform the Galaxy Tab A 10.5 though, despite being considerably cheaper.

The Tab A 10.1 typically performs well in daily use, although we did notice occasional hangs and stutters during heavy multitasking. This is the case when launching complex apps too.

Geekbench 4.4
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Apple iPad 6 2018
5952 Points ∼10% +48%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
5742 Points ∼10% +43%
Average of class Tablet (1106 - 18041, n=55)
4639 Points ∼8% +15%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (4017 - 4105, n=3)
4073 Points ∼7% +1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
4017 Points ∼7%
Lenovo Tab M10
3897 Points ∼7% -3%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
3846 Points ∼7% -4%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
3805 Points ∼7% -5%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
3305 Points ∼6% -18%
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Apple iPad 6 2018
3499 Points ∼55% +176%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
1712 Points ∼27% +35%
Average of class Tablet (429 - 5002, n=55)
1653 Points ∼26% +30%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (1268 - 1329, n=3)
1306 Points ∼21% +3%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
1268 Points ∼20%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
1204 Points ∼19% -5%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
940 Points ∼15% -26%
Lenovo Tab M10
774 Points ∼12% -39%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
745 Points ∼12% -41%
Geekbench 3
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
5626 Points ∼15% +48%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
4169 Points ∼11% +10%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
3799 Points ∼10%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
3799 Points ∼10% 0%
Average of class Tablet (1838 - 5734, n=25)
3550 Points ∼9% -7%
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
1772 Points ∼36% +40%
Average of class Tablet (616 - 3200, n=25)
1308 Points ∼27% +4%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
1263 Points ∼26%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
1263 Points ∼26% 0%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
753 Points ∼15% -40%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
6698 Points ∼56% +23%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
5452 Points ∼46%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (5269 - 5452, n=3)
5338 Points ∼45% -2%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
4719 Points ∼39% -13%
Average of class Tablet (2345 - 9615, n=40)
4415 Points ∼37% -19%
Lenovo Tab M10
4238 Points ∼35% -22%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
4171 Points ∼35% -23%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
3678 Points ∼31% -33%
Work performance score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
8126 Points ∼41% +26%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
6456 Points ∼33%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (5802 - 6923, n=3)
6394 Points ∼33% -1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
4914 Points ∼25% -24%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
4895 Points ∼25% -24%
Lenovo Tab M10
4836 Points ∼25% -25%
Average of class Tablet (1873 - 11644, n=79)
4799 Points ∼24% -26%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
4796 Points ∼24% -26%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
Points ∼0% -100%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics
Average of class Tablet (2053 - 2992, n=3)
2444 Points ∼16% +19%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
2288 Points ∼15% +11%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
2053 Points ∼13%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (2028 - 2061, n=3)
2047 Points ∼13% 0%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics
Average of class Tablet (612 - 5819, n=3)
2613 Points ∼18% +327%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
1408 Points ∼10% +130%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (604 - 964, n=3)
727 Points ∼5% +19%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
612 Points ∼4%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited
Average of class Tablet (725 - 4809, n=3)
2358 Points ∼16% +225%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
1540 Points ∼10% +112%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (717 - 1091, n=3)
844 Points ∼6% +16%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
725 Points ∼5%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
2424 Points ∼30% +38%
Lenovo Tab M10
1785 Points ∼22% +2%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
1768 Points ∼22% +1%
Average of class Tablet (650 - 3919, n=42)
1768 Points ∼22% +1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
1755 Points ∼22%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
1709 Points ∼21% -3%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (1657 - 1755, n=3)
1701 Points ∼21% -3%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
1632 Points ∼20% -7%
Apple iPad 6 2018
1627 Points ∼20% -7%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
1386 Points ∼17% -21%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Apple iPad 6 2018
3852 Points ∼46% +604%
Average of class Tablet (99 - 6993, n=42)
1921 Points ∼23% +251%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
1612 Points ∼19% +195%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
547 Points ∼7%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
528 Points ∼6% -3%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (488 - 549, n=3)
528 Points ∼6% -3%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
413 Points ∼5% -24%
Lenovo Tab M10
413 Points ∼5% -24%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
399 Points ∼5% -27%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
247 Points ∼3% -55%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Apple iPad 6 2018
2955 Points ∼43% +357%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
1742 Points ∼25% +170%
Average of class Tablet (129 - 5816, n=42)
1670 Points ∼24% +159%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
646 Points ∼9%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (579 - 646, n=3)
624 Points ∼9% -3%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
612 Points ∼9% -5%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
498 Points ∼7% -23%
Lenovo Tab M10
498 Points ∼7% -23%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
480 Points ∼7% -26%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
305 Points ∼4% -53%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
2413 Points ∼51% +41%
Lenovo Tab M10
1782 Points ∼38% +4%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
1766 Points ∼38% +3%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
1740 Points ∼37% +1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
1716 Points ∼36%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (1677 - 1716, n=3)
1701 Points ∼36% -1%
Apple iPad 6 2018
1690 Points ∼36% -2%
Average of class Tablet (739 - 4700, n=50)
1685 Points ∼36% -2%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
1648 Points ∼35% -4%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
1399 Points ∼30% -18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics
Apple iPad 6 2018
7253 Points ∼25% +782%
Average of class Tablet (165 - 28751, n=50)
3312 Points ∼12% +303%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
2534 Points ∼9% +208%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
822 Points ∼3%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (650 - 823, n=3)
765 Points ∼3% -7%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
754 Points ∼3% -8%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
712 Points ∼2% -13%
Lenovo Tab M10
712 Points ∼2% -13%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
602 Points ∼2% -27%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
402 Points ∼1% -51%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited
Apple iPad 6 2018
4190 Points ∼31% +351%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
2506 Points ∼19% +169%
Average of class Tablet (207 - 13454, n=50)
2193 Points ∼16% +136%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
930 Points ∼7%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (752 - 930, n=3)
871 Points ∼6% -6%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
840 Points ∼6% -10%
Lenovo Tab M10
822 Points ∼6% -12%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
821 Points ∼6% -12%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
701 Points ∼5% -25%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
485 Points ∼4% -48%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
2436 Points ∼54% +43%
Lenovo Tab M10
1818 Points ∼40% +7%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
1775 Points ∼40% +4%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
1744 Points ∼39% +2%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
1704 Points ∼38%
Average of class Tablet (793 - 3695, n=57)
1694 Points ∼38% -1%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (1657 - 1704, n=3)
1679 Points ∼37% -1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
1646 Points ∼37% -3%
Apple iPad 6 2018
1439 Points ∼32% -16%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
1363 Points ∼30% -20%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics
Apple iPad 6 2018
3682 Points ∼51% +579%
Average of class Tablet (55 - 6128, n=57)
1463 Points ∼20% +170%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
1451 Points ∼20% +168%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
542 Points ∼8%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (488 - 542, n=3)
523 Points ∼7% -4%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
413 Points ∼6% -24%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
363 Points ∼5% -33%
Lenovo Tab M10
363 Points ∼5% -33%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
235 Points ∼3% -57%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
193 Points ∼3% -64%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1)
Apple iPad 6 2018
2735 Points ∼43% +328%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
1594 Points ∼25% +149%
Average of class Tablet (70 - 5346, n=59)
1348 Points ∼21% +111%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
639 Points ∼10%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (582 - 639, n=3)
619 Points ∼10% -3%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
489 Points ∼8% -23%
Lenovo Tab M10
442 Points ∼7% -31%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
441 Points ∼7% -31%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
290 Points ∼5% -55%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
241 Points ∼4% -62%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
2456 Points ∼55% +44%
Lenovo Tab M10
1816 Points ∼41% +7%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
1802 Points ∼40% +6%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
1758 Points ∼39% +3%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
1702 Points ∼38%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (1677 - 1702, n=3)
1689 Points ∼38% -1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
1657 Points ∼37% -3%
Average of class Tablet (56 - 3678, n=62)
1573 Points ∼35% -8%
Apple iPad 6 2018
1535 Points ∼34% -10%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
1347 Points ∼30% -21%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics
Apple iPad 6 2018
6095 Points ∼54% +761%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
2357 Points ∼21% +233%
Average of class Tablet (42 - 10647, n=62)
2028 Points ∼18% +186%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
708 Points ∼6%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
696 Points ∼6% -2%
Lenovo Tab M10
694 Points ∼6% -2%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (650 - 708, n=3)
687 Points ∼6% -3%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
598 Points ∼5% -16%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
388 Points ∼3% -45%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
99 Points ∼1% -86%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0
Apple iPad 6 2018
3672 Points ∼45% +351%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
2378 Points ∼29% +192%
Average of class Tablet (53 - 6997, n=63)
1633 Points ∼20% +101%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
814 Points ∼10%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
806 Points ∼10% -1%
Lenovo Tab M10
804 Points ∼10% -1%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (752 - 814, n=3)
791 Points ∼10% -3%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
682 Points ∼8% -16%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
468 Points ∼6% -43%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
125 Points ∼2% -85%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics
Apple iPad 6 2018
15499 Points ∼18% +19%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
15117 Points ∼17% +16%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
14147 Points ∼16% +9%
Lenovo Tab M10
14076 Points ∼16% +8%
Average of class Tablet (3675 - 51374, n=154)
13484 Points ∼16% +4%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
13310 Points ∼15% +2%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
13055 Points ∼15% 0%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
12994 Points ∼15%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (12321 - 12994, n=3)
12605 Points ∼15% -3%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
12095 Points ∼14% -7%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score
Apple iPad 6 2018
62626 Points ∼12% +354%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
22381 Points ∼4% +62%
Average of class Tablet (2109 - 194856, n=154)
21062 Points ∼4% +53%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
13794 Points ∼3%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (13392 - 13821, n=3)
13669 Points ∼3% -1%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
12771 Points ∼2% -7%
Lenovo Tab M10
12386 Points ∼2% -10%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
12323 Points ∼2% -11%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
11419 Points ∼2% -17%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
6151 Points ∼1% -55%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score
Apple iPad 6 2018
37372 Points ∼16% +175%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
19315 Points ∼8% +42%
Average of class Tablet (2411 - 106954, n=155)
16463 Points ∼7% +21%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
13608 Points ∼6%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (13183 - 13608, n=3)
13416 Points ∼6% -1%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
13227 Points ∼6% -3%
Lenovo Tab M10
12726 Points ∼5% -6%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
12686 Points ∼5% -7%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
11791 Points ∼5% -13%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
6905 Points ∼3% -49%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16
Apple iPad 6 2018
125 fps ∼1% +400%
Apple iPad 6 2018
118 fps ∼1% +372%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
46 fps ∼0% +84%
Average of class Tablet (1 - 451, n=177)
33.8 fps ∼0% +35%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
25 fps ∼0%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
22 fps ∼0% -12%
Lenovo Tab M10
22 fps ∼0% -12%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (14 - 25, n=3)
21.3 fps ∼0% -15%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
21 fps ∼0% -16%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
20 fps ∼0% -20%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
12 fps ∼0% -52%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16
Apple iPad 6 2018
59.7 fps ∼2% +149%
Apple iPad 6 2018
59 fps ∼2% +146%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
32 fps ∼1% +33%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
24 fps ∼1%
Average of class Tablet (1.1 - 120, n=181)
21.7 fps ∼1% -10%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
21 fps ∼1% -12%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
20 fps ∼1% -17%
Lenovo Tab M10
20 fps ∼1% -17%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (12 - 24, n=3)
19.7 fps ∼1% -18%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
19 fps ∼1% -21%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
11 fps ∼0% -54%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL
Apple iPad 6 2018
62.6 fps ∼11% +382%
Apple iPad 6 2018
58.9 fps ∼11% +353%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
29 fps ∼5% +123%
Average of class Tablet (1.6 - 220, n=112)
23.2 fps ∼4% +78%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
13 fps ∼2%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (7 - 13, n=3)
11 fps ∼2% -15%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
9.9 fps ∼2% -24%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
9.2 fps ∼2% -29%
Lenovo Tab M10
9.2 fps ∼2% -29%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
8.8 fps ∼2% -32%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
4.9 fps ∼1% -62%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Apple iPad 6 2018
40.9 fps ∼11% +215%
Apple iPad 6 2018
40.3 fps ∼11% +210%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
17 fps ∼5% +31%
Average of class Tablet (1.9 - 110, n=118)
15.6 fps ∼4% +20%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
13 fps ∼4%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (6.2 - 13, n=3)
10.4 fps ∼3% -20%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
9.5 fps ∼3% -27%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
8.8 fps ∼2% -32%
Lenovo Tab M10
8.8 fps ∼2% -32%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
8.6 fps ∼2% -34%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
4.5 fps ∼1% -65%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Apple iPad 6 2018
42.7 fps ∼1% +427%
Average of class Tablet (1.7 - 173, n=64)
21.8 fps ∼0% +169%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
19 fps ∼0% +135%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
8.1 fps ∼0%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (4.3 - 8.1, n=3)
6.83 fps ∼0% -16%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
6.1 fps ∼0% -25%
Lenovo Tab M10
6 fps ∼0% -26%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
5.4 fps ∼0% -33%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
4.9 fps ∼0% -40%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
1.7 fps ∼0% -79%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Apple iPad 6 2018
27.3 fps ∼1% +255%
Average of class Tablet (2.7 - 95, n=64)
13.7 fps ∼0% +78%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
7.7 fps ∼0%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
6.9 fps ∼0% -10%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (3.8 - 7.7, n=3)
6.3 fps ∼0% -18%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
5.7 fps ∼0% -26%
Lenovo Tab M10
5.7 fps ∼0% -26%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
5.3 fps ∼0% -31%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
4.7 fps ∼0% -39%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
2.8 fps ∼0% -64%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Average of class Tablet (1.7 - 49, n=15)
12.4 fps ∼8% +313%
Apple iPad 6 2018
12.3 fps ∼8% +310%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
4.3 fps ∼3% +43%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
3 fps ∼2%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (2.7 - 3, n=3)
2.87 fps ∼2% -4%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
1.7 fps ∼1% -43%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Average of class Tablet (1 - 51.1, n=15)
13.4 fps ∼12% +644%
Apple iPad 6 2018
10.8 fps ∼10% +500%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
4.4 fps ∼4% +144%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
1.8 fps ∼2%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (1.7 - 1.8, n=3)
1.767 fps ∼2% -2%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
1.1 fps ∼1% -39%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Apple iPad 6 2018
20 fps ∼10% +308%
Average of class Tablet (2.7 - 58, n=15)
18.1 fps ∼9% +269%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
6.8 fps ∼3% +39%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
4.9 fps ∼2%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (4.2 - 4.9, n=3)
4.47 fps ∼2% -9%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
2.7 fps ∼1% -45%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Average of class Tablet (2.8 - 134, n=15)
36.1 fps ∼14% +622%
Apple iPad 6 2018
30.8 fps ∼12% +516%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
12 fps ∼5% +140%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
5 fps ∼2%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (4.7 - 5, n=3)
4.8 fps ∼2% -4%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
2.8 fps ∼1% -44%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen
Apple iPad 6 2018
26.8 fps ∼7% +415%
Average of class Tablet (1.8 - 107, n=41)
15.9 fps ∼4% +206%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
8.5 fps ∼2% +63%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
5.2 fps ∼1%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (2.6 - 5.2, n=3)
4.33 fps ∼1% -17%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
3.4 fps ∼1% -35%
Lenovo Tab M10
3.4 fps ∼1% -35%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
3.2 fps ∼1% -38%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
2 fps ∼1% -62%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
1.8 fps ∼0% -65%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen
Apple iPad 6 2018
17.9 fps ∼11% +258%
Average of class Tablet (1.7 - 47, n=41)
9.27 fps ∼5% +85%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
6.4 fps ∼4% +28%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
5 fps ∼3%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (2.7 - 5, n=3)
4.1 fps ∼2% -18%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
3.3 fps ∼2% -34%
Lenovo Tab M10
3.3 fps ∼2% -34%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
3 fps ∼2% -40%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
2 fps ∼1% -60%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
1.7 fps ∼1% -66%
Basemark GPU
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen
Average of class Tablet (8.72 - 21.8, n=3)
14.5 fps ∼16% +66%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
13.1 fps ∼14% +50%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
8.72 (min: 4.95, max: 24.96) fps ∼9%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (6.21 - 8.72, n=2)
7.47 fps ∼8% -14%
Vulkan Medium Native
Average of class Tablet (7.67 - 14.8, n=2)
11.2 fps ∼30%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
7.67 fps ∼21%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
6.43 fps ∼17%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
fps ∼0%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen
Average of class Tablet (12 - 22.7, n=2)
17.4 fps ∼12%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
12.04 fps ∼9%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
5.35 fps ∼4%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
0 fps ∼0%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score
Apple iPad 6 2018
170921 Points ∼30% +69%
Average of class Tablet (20856 - 566378, n=31)
165344 Points ∼29% +63%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
156772 Points ∼28% +55%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (101367 - 108360, n=3)
104311 Points ∼18% +3%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
101367 Points ∼18%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
86908 Points ∼15% -14%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
77717 Points ∼14% -23%
Lenovo Tab M10
70878 Points ∼13% -30%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
70431 Points ∼12% -31%
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
122959 Points ∼42% +72%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (71303 - 75333, n=2)
73318 Points ∼25% +3%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
71303 Points ∼24%
Average of class Tablet (14200 - 227987, n=67)
69584 Points ∼24% -2%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
66863 Points ∼23% -6%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
63777 Points ∼22% -11%
Lenovo Tab M10
58122 Points ∼20% -18%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
55314 Points ∼19% -22%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
44191 Points ∼15% -38%
VRMark - Amber Room
Average of class Tablet (1423 - 3130, n=2)
2277 Score ∼45%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
1423 Score ∼28%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904
927 Score ∼18%
BaseMark OS II
Web
Apple iPad 6 2018
1628 Points ∼80% +60%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
1144 Points ∼56% +13%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
1016 Points ∼50%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
1010 Points ∼50% -1%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (974 - 1016, n=3)
991 Points ∼49% -2%
Average of class Tablet (9 - 2034, n=109)
765 Points ∼38% -25%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
742 Points ∼36% -27%
Lenovo Tab M10
735 Points ∼36% -28%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
682 Points ∼34% -33%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
10 Points ∼0% -99%
Graphics
Apple iPad 6 2018
6760 Points ∼23% +530%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
2816 Points ∼10% +162%
Average of class Tablet (98 - 28853, n=110)
2314 Points ∼8% +116%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (1038 - 1114, n=3)
1075 Points ∼4% 0%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
1073 Points ∼4%
Lenovo Tab M10
949 Points ∼3% -12%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
943 Points ∼3% -12%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
836 Points ∼3% -22%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
833 Points ∼3% -22%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
511 Points ∼2% -52%
Memory
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
2894 Points ∼39% +39%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (1935 - 2973, n=3)
2329 Points ∼31% +12%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
2079 Points ∼28%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
1948 Points ∼26% -6%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
1513 Points ∼20% -27%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
1362 Points ∼18% -34%
Apple iPad 6 2018
1334 Points ∼18% -36%
Average of class Tablet (56 - 5617, n=110)
1113 Points ∼15% -46%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
969 Points ∼13% -53%
Lenovo Tab M10
846 Points ∼11% -59%
System
Apple iPad 6 2018
6820 Points ∼41% +94%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
5315 Points ∼32% +51%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (3517 - 3957, n=3)
3754 Points ∼23% +7%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
3517 Points ∼21%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
3080 Points ∼19% -12%
Lenovo Tab M10
2845 Points ∼17% -19%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
2561 Points ∼16% -27%
Average of class Tablet (482 - 16467, n=110)
2516 Points ∼15% -28%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
2329 Points ∼14% -34%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
2240 Points ∼14% -36%
Overall
Apple iPad 6 2018
3163 Points ∼37% +88%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
2653 Points ∼31% +58%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (1679 - 1862, n=3)
1741 Points ∼21% +4%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
1681 Points ∼20%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
1389 Points ∼16% -17%
Average of class Tablet (150 - 8450, n=109)
1322 Points ∼16% -21%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
1312 Points ∼16% -22%
Lenovo Tab M10
1138 Points ∼13% -32%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
1015 Points ∼12% -40%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
389 Points ∼5% -77%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score
Average of class Tablet (301 - 5300, n=15)
1730 Points ∼33% +475%
Apple iPad 6 2018
1693 Points ∼32% +462%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
444 Points ∼8% +48%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
301 Points ∼6%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (241 - 301, n=2)
271 Points ∼5% -10%

Legend

 
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019 Samsung Exynos 7904, ARM Mali-G71 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N Qualcomm Snapdragon 450, Qualcomm Adreno 506, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585 Samsung Exynos 7870 Octa, ARM Mali-T830 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite HiSilicon Kirin 659, ARM Mali-T830 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017 Mediatek MT8173, PowerVR GX6250, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Apple iPad 6 2018 Apple A10 Fusion, Apple A10 Fusion GPU / PowerVR, 32 GB NVMe
 
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720 Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Qualcomm Adreno 616, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Lenovo Tab M10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 450, Qualcomm Adreno 506, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Our review unit performed well in benchmarks too and even occasionally outperformed the Tab S5e. Overall, web-browsing feels snappy on the preinstalled Samsung browser, but complex websites and media content sometimes take a moment or two longer to appear than they would on more expensive tablets.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average of class Tablet (22.1 - 110, n=6)
69.7 Points ∼100% +215%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720 (Chrome 74.0.3729.136)
33.6 Points ∼48% +52%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (22.1 - 22.7, n=3)
22.5 Points ∼32% +2%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019 (Samung Browser 9.2)
22.14 Points ∼32%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Apple iPad 6 2018 (Safari Mobile 11.3)
167.2 Points ∼100% +288%
Average of class Tablet (10.9 - 279, n=86)
53.7 Points ∼32% +25%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720 (Chrome 74.0.3729.136)
49.121 Points ∼29% +14%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017 (Amazon Silk 61.2)
46.39 Points ∼28% +8%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (42.7 - 45.1, n=3)
43.7 Points ∼26% +1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019 (Samsung Browser 9.2)
43.131 Points ∼26%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite (Chrome 67)
29.598 Points ∼18% -31%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585 (Chrome 52.0.2743.98)
23.712 Points ∼14% -45%
Lenovo Tab M10 (Chrome 71.0.3578.99)
22.219 Points ∼13% -48%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N (Chrome 69.0.3497.100)
22.084 Points ∼13% -49%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Apple iPad 6 2018 (Safari Mobile 10)
79 Points ∼100% +41%
Average of class Tablet (23 - 182, n=22)
76.7 Points ∼97% +37%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720 (Chrome 74.0.3729.136)
66 Points ∼84% +18%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019 (Samsung Browser 9.2)
56 Points ∼71%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (52 - 56, n=3)
53.3 Points ∼67% -5%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite (Chrome 67)
42 Points ∼53% -25%
Lenovo Tab M10 (Chrome 71.0.3578.99)
34 Points ∼43% -39%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N (Chrome 69.0.3497.100)
33 Points ∼42% -41%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Apple iPad 6 2018 (IOS 12.1.1)
65.5 (min: 64, max: 67) runs/min ∼100% +204%
Average of class Tablet (11.1 - 132, n=12)
60.1 runs/min ∼92% +178%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720 (Chrome 74.0.3729.136)
33.74 runs/min ∼52% +56%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (19.3 - 24.1, n=3)
21.7 runs/min ∼33% +1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019 (Samsung Browser 9.2)
21.58 runs/min ∼33%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPad 6 2018 (Safari Mobile 11.3)
27967 Points ∼100% +222%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720 (Chrome 74.0.3729.136)
11312 Points ∼40% +30%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019 (Samsung Browser 9.2)
8696 Points ∼31%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017 (Amazon Silk 61.2)
8570 Points ∼31% -1%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (7798 - 9087, n=3)
8527 Points ∼30% -2%
Average of class Tablet (1238 - 45734, n=172)
6956 Points ∼25% -20%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite (Chrome 67)
5412 Points ∼19% -38%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N (Chrome 69.0.3497.100)
4078 Points ∼15% -53%
Lenovo Tab M10 (Chrome 71.0.3578.99)
3990 Points ∼14% -54%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585 (Chrome 52.0.2743.98)
3855 Points ∼14% -56%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N (Chrome 69.0.3497.100)
11529.2 ms * ∼100% -184%
Lenovo Tab M10 (Chrome 71.0.3578.99)
11447.7 ms * ∼99% -182%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585 (Chrome 52.0.2743.98)
9788.7 ms * ∼85% -141%
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite (Chrome 67)
9248.9 ms * ∼80% -128%
Average of class Tablet (603 - 43092, n=183)
9160 ms * ∼79% -126%
Average Samsung Exynos 7904 (3703 - 4976, n=3)
4245 ms * ∼37% -5%
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019 (Samsung Browser 9.2)
4054.8 ms * ∼35%
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017 (Amazon Silk 61.2)
3975.5 ms * ∼34% +2%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720 (Chrome 74.0.3729.136)
3496.3 ms * ∼30% +14%
Apple iPad 6 2018 (Safari Mobile 11.3)
1025.5 ms * ∼9% +75%

* ... smaller is better

Samsung has equipped the Tab A 10.1 with 32 GB of eMMC flash storage, of which around 23.6 GB is available upon delivery. It would have been prudent of Samsung to have equipped the tablet with more storage considering the intention of it being used by a family, but its transfer speeds are acceptable. Samsung has equipped the device with faster storage than its predecessor, and it is slightly faster than we would have expected from 32 GB eMMC flash storage. Overall, the storage is rather slow at writing small blocks of data and puts the Tab A 10.1 in the midfield of our comparison table.

The Tab A 10.1 has a reasonably fast microSD card reader. Transfer speeds are above average and are on par with our comparison devices.

Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590NSamsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585Huawei MediaPad M5 liteAmazon Fire HD 10 2017Lenovo Tab M10Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720Average 32 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Tablet
AndroBench 3-5
5%
-30%
101%
-18%
-12%
32%
-5%
-46%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
65.59 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
60.39 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-8%
50.09 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-24%
72.8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
11%
30.14 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-54%
61.22 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-7%
60.76 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-7%
50.2 (3.4 - 87.1, n=140)
-23%
45.9 (14 - 73.8, n=53)
-30%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
81.16 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
80.6 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-1%
75.54 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-7%
83.7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
3%
55.49 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-32%
83.48 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
3%
76.12 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-6%
68.9 (8.2 - 96.5, n=140)
-15%
63.7 (17.6 - 87.7, n=53)
-22%
Random Write 4KB
11.37
13.39
18%
10.01
-12%
77.25
579%
9.37
-18%
11.32
0%
18.79
65%
18.3 (0.75 - 77.3, n=181)
61%
6.66 (0.13 - 170, n=204)
-41%
Random Read 4KB
62.56
71.13
14%
23.46
-62%
73.47
17%
27.72
-56%
52.5
-16%
79.19
27%
38.9 (3.59 - 117, n=181)
-38%
19.6 (1.04 - 192, n=204)
-69%
Sequential Write 256KB
90.71
103.32
14%
45.88
-49%
82.56
-9%
147.67
63%
52.6
-42%
197.05
117%
94.6 (14.8 - 189, n=181)
4%
41.3 (2.04 - 522, n=204)
-54%
Sequential Read 256KB
300.03
285.63
-5%
215.76
-28%
308.15
3%
262.2
-13%
279.94
-7%
294.35
-2%
236 (25.8 - 452, n=181)
-21%
117 (6.75 - 1416, n=204)
-61%

Games

The ARM Mali-G71 MP2 does not set any performance or speed records on paper, but it is still a competent GPU. However, it cannot always deliver smooth frame rates in our review unit. The reason for this is mainly because of the tablet’s high-resolution display. Simple games like Candy Crush and Temple Run play without any issues, but things start becoming choppy in more complex titles like Asphalt 9: Legends and PUBG Mobile.

We experienced dropped frames in Asphalt 9: Legends, Battle Bay and PUBG Mobile regardless of the graphics settings we used. We have included GameBench graphs below that demonstrate the erratic gaming performance of the Tab A 10.1. These three titles still averaged around 30 FPS, which is playable. However, you will have to put up with occasionally choppy sequences.

The touchscreen worked perfectly during our gaming tests, while the large display provides an engrossing experience. The stereo speakers sounded good too, but we found them easy to cover if we were gaming with the tablet in landscape mode.

PUBG Mobile
Asphalt 9: Legends
Battle Bay
PUBG Mobile
010203040Tooltip
; Smooth; 0.12.0: Ø29.6 (22-32)
; Balanced; 0.12.0: Ø25.8 (16-28)
; HD; 0.12.0: Ø29 (1-32)
Asphalt 9
010203040Tooltip
; High Quality; 1.5.4a: Ø28.7 (24-31)
; Standard / low; 1.5.4a: Ø27.5 (17-31)
Battle Bay
0102030405060Tooltip
; 4.4.22399: Ø46.8 (35-58)

Emissions

Temperature

GFXBench battery test: T-Rex - OpenGL ES 2.0
GFXBench battery test: T-Rex - OpenGL ES 2.0
GFXBench battery test: Manhattan - OpenGL ES 3.1
GFXBench battery test: Manhattan - OpenGL ES 3.1

The Tab A 10.1 manages its surface temperatures reasonably well. Our review unit never feels hot, but the bottom third of the display always feel warm, even at idle. Several areas do not exceed 30 °C under load though, which is impressively cool.

We also subjected the Tab A 10.1 to two GFXBench battery tests that we run on a loop for 30 times each. Most devices handle T-Rex easily but thermal throttle during the Manhattan benchmark. The Tab A 10.1 does not throttle its performance in either benchmark, so you should not experience any loss in performance even during prolonged gaming sessions.

Max. Load
 35.4 °C
96 F
31.3 °C
88 F
33.6 °C
92 F
 
 36.3 °C
97 F
31 °C
88 F
32.2 °C
90 F
 
 32.6 °C
91 F
30.8 °C
87 F
33.4 °C
92 F
 
Maximum: 36.3 °C = 97 F
Average: 33 °C = 91 F
29.3 °C
85 F
30.7 °C
87 F
33.1 °C
92 F
29.5 °C
85 F
29.8 °C
86 F
33.2 °C
92 F
29.4 °C
85 F
30.8 °C
87 F
32 °C
90 F
Maximum: 33.2 °C = 92 F
Average: 30.9 °C = 88 F
Power Supply (max.)  32.3 °C = 90 F | Room Temperature 21.3 °C = 70 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 33 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 30.7 °C / 87 F for the devices in the class Tablet.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 36.3 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 34.8 °C / 95 F, ranging from 22.2 to 51.8 °C for the class Tablet.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 33.2 °C / 92 F, compared to the average of 34.3 °C / 94 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.4 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 30.7 °C / 87 F.
Heat map of the front of the device under load
Heat map of the front of the device under load
Heat map of the back of the device under load
Heat map of the back of the device under load

Speakers

Pink noise speaker characteristics
Pink noise speaker characteristics

The Tab A 10.1 has stereo speakers that sit on the bottom edge of the tablet if you are holding it in portrait mode. The speakers deliver a weak sound experience, but they get quite loud, nonetheless. Mid tones are present at medium volumes, but they become dominated by shrill high-frequency tones at high volumes.

In practice, music sounds dull and lifeless when played over the speakers. Worse still, the speakers distort heavily at maximum volume for a punishingly unforgiving sound. Overall, the speakers are good enough for occasionally listening to music or watching videos. We would recommend using external audio equipment where possible though for a better listening experience.

The Tab A 10.1 has plenty of options on that front too. The device supports audio output via its 3.5 mm jack, Bluetooth and USB Type-C. The two wired options reproduced audio cleanly and with little electronic interference. Bluetooth worked perfectly too, with the tablet supporting high-resolution codecs like LDAC and aptX. HWA, aptX HD and dual audio are missing though.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2038.924.32530.9323126.3284027.326.45033.130.96326.322.28024.224.910024.43612518.14416022.552.520018.55125017.557.731514.766.140015.266.350014.670.16301574.280013.473.8100014.370.7125013.868.8160013.568.6200013.772.1250013.575.1315014.276.6400013.971.9500014.676.4630014.976.1800014.978.71000014.775.21250014.765.4160001553SPL26.686.2N0.869.5median 14.7median 70.1Delta1.88.332.33625.634.825.73627.428.13735.523.328.621.431.521.734.719.942.717.448.71756.716.45914.558.714.26314.160.512.655.612.557.61258.311.863.311.669.611.469.311.369.911.470.911.171.611.270.411.369.511.269.411.359.811.359.411.349.565.56767.167.365.824.180.518.919.520.221.617.80.646.7median 11.8median 59.81.79.3hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseSamsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.1% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (15% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 16% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 78% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 50%
Compared to all devices tested
» 15% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 81% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Huawei MediaPad M5 lite audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 9.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 9% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (15.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 16% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 78% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 50%
Compared to all devices tested
» 15% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 80% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Power Management

Power Consumption

The Tab A 10.1 proved to be more power-hungry than the Tab A 10.5 in our tests, especially when idling at minimal display brightness. The same goes for maximum power consumption under load. Overall, the Tab A 10.1 falls short of most of our comparison devices. Only the iPad 6 2018 consumes more than our review unit.

Perhaps more frustratingly, the Tab A 10.1 takes over five hours to fully recharge with the included charger. The tablet could be charged faster with a more powerful charger though.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.01 / 0.13 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1.66 / 4.28 / 4.44 Watt
Load midlight 7.53 / 9.09 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
6150 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
7300 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
7300 mAh
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
7500 mAh
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
6300 mAh
Apple iPad 6 2018
 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
7040 mAh
Power Consumption
17%
12%
4%
3%
-60%
15%
Idle Minimum *
1.66
1.26
24%
1.18
29%
2.8
-69%
1.55
7%
2.2
-33%
2.07
-25%
Idle Average *
4.28
4.22
1%
4.65
-9%
3.3
23%
4.17
3%
7.8
-82%
3.94
8%
Idle Maximum *
4.44
4.29
3%
4.74
-7%
3.9
12%
4.25
4%
7.9
-78%
3.96
11%
Load Average *
7.53
5.48
27%
5.75
24%
5.2
31%
7.13
5%
12.6
-67%
4.07
46%
Load Maximum *
9.09
6.57
28%
6.97
23%
7.2
21%
9.63
-6%
12.8
-41%
5.73
37%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The Tab A 10.1 has a 6,150 mAh battery, which is 1,150 mAh smaller than the one in its predecessors and is smaller than all our other comparison devices. Correspondingly, our review unit lasted considerably shorter in our battery life tests than our Galaxy Tab A comparison devices, but the Tab A 10.1 still finished in the midfield of our comparison table overall.

The best way to compare battery life between devices is to set their displays at the same luminosity, which we do for our H.264 looped video and Wi-Fi battery life tests. We set displays to approximately 150 cd/m², for reference. Our review unit lasted slightly longer than the iPad 6 2018 in the latter test along with the Fire HD 10 and Galaxy Tab S5e. The Tab A 10.1 also achieved a better runtime than the Fire HD 10 in our H.264 video test, but it fell short of the rest of our comparison devices. Overall, the Tab A 10.1 has decent battery life, but we expected better considering the performance of its predecessors in our battery life test.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
25h 00min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3 (Samsung Browser 9.2)
12h 03min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
13h 58min
Load (maximum brightness)
5h 47min
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019
6150 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2016 SM-T585
7300 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5 SM-T590N
7300 mAh
Amazon Fire HD 10 2017
6300 mAh
Huawei MediaPad M5 lite
7500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab S5e SM-T720
7040 mAh
Apple iPad 6 2018
 mAh
Battery Runtime
30%
22%
-28%
15%
-10%
-24%
Reader / Idle
1500
2634
76%
1960
31%
960
-36%
2162
44%
1263
-16%
H.264
838
893
7%
963
15%
585
-30%
934
11%
864
3%
WiFi v1.3
723
826
14%
938
30%
542
-25%
852
18%
623
-14%
714
-1%
Load
347
428
23%
385
11%
274
-21%
299
-14%
300
-14%
185
-47%

Pros

+ slim design
+ Android 9.0 Pie
+ Kids mode
+ Bluetooth 5.0 with support for high resolution codecs
+ decent battery life
+ good LCD panel

Cons

- no ambient light sensor
- dimmer display than its predecessor
- short USB cable included in the box
- underwhelming speakers
- choppy gaming

Verdict

The Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 (2019) tablet review.
The Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 (2019) tablet review.

The Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 (2019) is an affordable entry-level tablet that can already be found for less than 200 Euros (~$223). The same applies to its predecessor though, which has a better display, speakers and more RAM. Moreover, the Tab A 10.5 has longer battery life and supports an optional keyboard. The Tab A 10.1 shines with its improved SoC and its more recent version of Android though. The latter is worth mentioning, as tablets often do not receive software updates as frequently as smartphones do.

Overall, choosing between the Tab A 10.1 and its predecessor depends on what you find important in a tablet. The price difference between the two devices will likely narrow in future though, which would make the Tab A 10.1 more of an attractive option.

The Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 is a rock-solid budget tablet, which is good value for money and is well suited for use by families with young children.

2 GB of RAM and 32 GB of storage are rather tight for a system running Android 9.0 Pie, especially as Samsung has positioned the Tab A 10.1 as a family device that supports multiple user accounts. The lack of an ambient light sensor and no integrated reading mode feels like cost saving too. In short, the Tab A 10.1 is a decent budget tablet, but Samsung has cut a few too many corners for our liking.

Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.1 2019 - 05/30/2019 v6(old)
Daniel Schmidt

Chassis
80%
Keyboard
69 / 80 → 87%
Pointing Device
89%
Connectivity
33 / 65 → 51%
Weight
84 / 40-88 → 91%
Battery
95%
Display
85%
Games Performance
34 / 68 → 50%
Application Performance
56 / 76 → 74%
Temperature
92%
Noise
100%
Audio
61 / 91 → 67%
Camera
48 / 85 → 56%
Average
71%