Nexus 7 (2013) - Mini Review
by Brian Klug on July 27, 2013 12:54 AM EST- Posted in
- Tablets
- Snapdragon
- Qualcomm
- Android
- Mobile
- APQ8064
- Nexus 7
- Android 4.3
I hesitate to do quick turnaround reviews of products, that’s why this is a short review and Anand is hopefully going to take a longer look at the Nexus 7 (2013). From the time that I’ve spent with the new Nexus 7 however, I think it’s safe at this point to deem it more than a worthy successor to the tablet that not only dominated its form factor for its entire run, but proved that 7-inches was probably the right size for Android tablets. The display is excellent, and at present the best in its 7–8 inch class, beating even the iPad mini in terms of GMB Delta-E 2000 and resolution. Performance is great, build quality is great, and the whole affair runs stock, unadulterated Android 4.3.
The new Nexus 7 is everything a generational refresh should be – performance goes up dramatically, issues were fixed (storage), features were added (5 GHz WiFi, rear facing camera, Qi charging, high DPI display), and it’s all in a thinner and lighter form factor. Everything about the OG Nexus 7 is better in the 2013 model, all while keeping basically the same price point, and we haven’t even looked at the 4G LTE enabled version yet which adds the right kind of operator-agnostic LTE bands for two regions that I’ve been begging for. It’s undeniable that Google is doing something right with the Nexus program, and along with it, hardware partner ASUS.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
252 Comments
View All Comments
Roland00Address - Saturday, July 27, 2013 - link
The only thing this mini review is lacking compared to a normal review is the battery tests, that and the writer felt rush but Brian did a great job with such limited time.thesavvymage - Sunday, July 28, 2013 - link
Anand will personally be doing an incredibly in-depth analysis of nearly everything this tablet has to offer in the near future. You should go look up one of anand's iPad reviews, they are probably 3 or 4 times as long as this one. He does an amazing jobchrone - Saturday, July 27, 2013 - link
Great reviews as always. Does it still have transition animation micro stuttering when autobrightness is on and in outdoor?psyside1 - Saturday, July 27, 2013 - link
Can anyone tell me, is the unit tested 16 or 32GB version? i never saw clarification about it, which is the only thing missing in this review, other then that fantastic job.Also how much faster should the 32GB model be, if this one was 16GB version? (knowing flash benefit from size) 16 vs 32GB, might be nice to see for the future Anand review.
Krysto - Saturday, July 27, 2013 - link
Why would flash benefit from size? Either way, there shouldn't be major differences in speed.psyside1 - Saturday, July 27, 2013 - link
Why bigger SSD/USB drives, are always faster then smaller?Krysto - Saturday, July 27, 2013 - link
They might, but I doubt it has anything to do with the size, and more with the manufacturer's "strategy" of making higher store that is more expensive, also have higher speed.But that's like saying cameras with more MPs are automatically better because they have more MP's, when in fact they are usually better because the camera makers work in parallel to also improve the overall quality of the camera module, while increasing the MP count, too, for the next generation cameras.
Death666Angel - Saturday, July 27, 2013 - link
You should educate yourself on that one, your first statement is clearly wrong. The way SSDs get their exceptional speed is by using packages of NAND in parallel. And how many packages of NAND an SSD has directly corresponds to the size of the SSD. Look up a few reviews of SSDs on Anandtech and you will get a break-down of packages vs size, the one of the 840 EVO being a great example to study because of the inclusion of all sizes. It is not just an arbitrary decision to justify the price tag. The explanation is in the technology, not in the marketing this time.psyside1 - Sunday, July 28, 2013 - link
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6130/the-16gb-nexus-...How about you educate your self, instead of me? thanks.
Bast - Sunday, July 28, 2013 - link
Actually he's right. your link is not relevant as the eMMC devices most probably use only one chip and no parallel controller like SSDs do. In addition, in HDDs, the higher storage is because of higher densities of data on platters that rotate at the same speed as lower capacity drives which translates to higher rates.