Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarTrekstor SurfTab B10
Specifications
Secondary Camera: 0.3 MPix
Pricecompare
Average of 1 scores (from 1 reviews)
Reviews for the Trekstor SurfTab B10
TrekStor focuses on the budget sector of the market with devices with performance that is catered to specific usage scenarios. With the Surftab B10, you get a tablet that is suitable for web-surfing but not much more. In our test, we look into what potential purchasers can expect from the TrekStor Surftab B10.
Source: Tablet Blog
DE→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Medium, Date: 09/05/2018
Comment
ARM Mali-T720 MP2: Integrated graphics card in ARM based SoCs. Can be configured with up to 8 cores (T720 MP8) and 650 MHz core clock (at 28nm). Supports OpenGL ES 3.1, OpenCL 1.1, DirectX 11 FL9_3, and Renderscript.
These graphics cards are not suited for Windows 3D games. Office and Internet surfing however is possible.
» Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Graphics Cards and the corresponding Benchmark List.
MT8163 V/A 1.5 GHz: Quad-Core ARM Cortex-A53 SoC clocked at up to 1.5 GHz (V/A version) with integrated Mali-T720 MP2 clocked at 600 MHz graphics card.» Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Processsors.
10.10":
This is a standard display format for tablet computers or small convertibles. You see more on the screen than on a smartphone but you can't use big resolutions well. On the other hand, mobility is not a problem.
» To find out how fine a display is, see our DPI List.Trekstor:
TrekStor GmbH is a German hardware company which sells entertainment electronics such as USB sticks, external hard drives, satellite receivers, MP3 players, e-book readers, tablet computers and smartphones. The predecessor company TrekStor GmbH & Co. KG was founded in 2001. After an insolvency in 2009 the renamed Trekstor GmbH became a subsidiary of the Chinese Telefield International Holdings Limited.
There were several reviews in 2014 and 2015, yet hardly any in 2016. The ratings tended to be below average to poor. The market shares are low (as of 2016).
73.7%: This rating is poor. More than three quarters of the models are rated better. That is rather not a purchase recommendation. Even if verbal ratings in this area do not sound that bad ("sufficient" or "satisfactory"), they are usually euphemisms that disguise a classification as a below-average laptop.
» Further information can be found in our Notebook Purchase Guide.
