The Android tablet market is heating up, with options ranging from ultra-premium flagships to budget-friendly contenders. The vivo Pad5e and Samsung Galaxy Tab A9+ represent distinct approaches: the Pad5e prioritizes raw processing power with its Snapdragon 8s Gen 3, while the A9+ focuses on delivering a well-rounded experience at a more accessible price point. This comparison dissects their key differences to help you determine which tablet best suits your needs.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For users prioritizing performance and future-proofing, the vivo Pad5e is the clear winner. Its Snapdragon 8s Gen 3 offers a significant leap in processing power over the Tab A9+'s Snapdragon 695. However, the Samsung Galaxy Tab A9+ remains a compelling option for those seeking a reliable, all-day tablet with good value.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | N/A | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | N/A | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | N/A | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 20, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66 |
| 5G bands | - | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 |
| EDGE | No | - |
| GPRS | No | - |
| Speed | - | HSPA, LTE, 5G - cellular model only |
| Technology | No cellular connectivity | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2025, October 13 | 2023, October 05 |
| Status | Available. Released 2025, October 17 | Available. Released 2023, October 17 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, aluminum back, aluminum frame | - |
| Dimensions | 266.4 x 192 x 6.6 mm (10.49 x 7.56 x 0.26 in) | 257.1 x 168.7 x 6.9 mm (10.12 x 6.64 x 0.27 in) |
| SIM | No | Nano-SIM + eSIM (cellular model only) |
| Weight | 584 g or 591 g (1.29 lb) | 480 g or 492 g (1.06 lb) |
| Display |
|---|
| Resolution | 1968 x 2800 pixels (~283 ppi density) | 1200 x 1920 pixels, 16:10 ratio (~206 ppi density) |
| Size | 12.1 inches, 444.4 cm2 (~86.9% screen-to-body ratio) | 11.0 inches, 350.9 cm2 (~80.9% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 1B colors, 144Hz, HDR10, 900 nits (peak) | TFT LCD, 90Hz |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (1x3.0 GHz Cortex-X4 & 4x2.8 GHz Cortex-A720 & 3x2.0 GHz Cortex-A520) | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 660 Silver) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM8635 Snapdragon 8s Gen 3 (4 nm) | Qualcomm SM6375 Snapdragon 695 5G (6 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 735 | Adreno 619 |
| OS | Android 15, OriginOS 5 HD | Android 13, upgradable to Android 15, One UI 7 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | No | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM, 512GB 16GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash | - |
| Single | 8 MP | 8 MP, AF |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Single | 5 MP | 5 MP |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 35mm jack | No | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes, with stereo speakers (4 speakers) | Yes, with stereo speakers (4 speakers) |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.4, A2DP, LE | 5.1, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | No |
| Positioning | Unspecified | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS - cellular model only |
| Radio | No | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 3.2, OTG, magnetic connector | USB Type-C 2.0 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6, dual-band | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Accelerometer, proximity (accessories only), gyro | Accelerometer, gyro, proximity (accessories only), compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 44W wired, PD
5W reverse wired | 15W wired |
| Type | 10000 mAh | Li-Po 7040 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Gray, Blue, Purple, Green, Gray, Silver | Graphite, Silver, Navy |
| Models | - | SM-X210, SM-X215, SM-X216B |
| Price | About 240 EUR | $ 199.99 |
| SAR | - | 0.42 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 1.19 W/kg (body) |
vivo Pad5e
- Significantly faster processor (Snapdragon 8s Gen 3)
- Faster 44W charging with PD support
- Potentially better thermal management due to 4nm process
- Likely higher price point
- Battery life may be shorter due to more powerful processor
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9+
- More affordable price
- Potentially longer battery life due to efficient processor
- Reliable performance for everyday tasks
- Slower processor (Snapdragon 695)
- Slower 15W charging
- Less capable for demanding applications
Display Comparison
Both tablets' display specifications are not provided, so a direct comparison is limited. However, given the Pad5e's positioning, it likely features a higher-quality panel with potentially higher brightness and color accuracy. The A9+ will likely prioritize cost-effectiveness. The absence of LTPO technology in either device suggests neither will offer adaptive refresh rates for power saving. Bezels are likely comparable, reflecting the budget-to-midrange nature of both devices.
Camera Comparison
Camera details are sparse, but given the market segment, neither tablet is expected to excel in photography. The focus will be on basic video calling and document scanning. Without specific sensor information, it’s difficult to make a definitive judgment. However, the Pad5e, being positioned as a more premium device, *may* incorporate a slightly better main sensor. The inclusion of a 2MP macro camera on the A9+ is likely a marketing feature with limited practical utility.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The vivo Pad5e’s Qualcomm SM8635 Snapdragon 8s Gen 3 (4nm) is a substantial upgrade over the Samsung Galaxy Tab A9+'s Snapdragon 695 5G (6nm). The 8s Gen 3 boasts a Cortex-X4 prime core clocked at 3.0 GHz, alongside Cortex-A720 and A520 cores, offering significantly higher single-core and multi-core performance. The 6nm process node of the 695 is less efficient than the 4nm node of the 8s Gen 3, meaning the vivo Pad5e will likely exhibit better thermal management and sustained performance under load. This translates to smoother gaming, faster app loading times, and a more responsive overall experience for the Pad5e. The A9+’s Kryo 660 cores are geared towards efficiency, making it suitable for everyday tasks but lacking the headroom for intensive applications.
Battery Life
Battery capacity is not specified for either device. However, the vivo Pad5e’s 44W wired charging with PD support is a significant advantage over the Tab A9+'s 15W charging. This means the Pad5e can be rapidly recharged, minimizing downtime. While the A9+ may compensate with a larger battery capacity, the faster charging of the Pad5e offers greater convenience. The 5W reverse wired charging on the Pad5e adds a useful, albeit niche, functionality for topping up smaller devices.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo Pad5e if you need a tablet capable of handling demanding tasks like gaming, video editing, or running multiple apps simultaneously. Its superior chipset ensures a smoother, more responsive experience. Buy the Samsung Galaxy Tab A9+ if you prefer a tablet focused on everyday tasks like browsing, streaming, and light productivity, and value longer battery life and a lower price tag.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Snapdragon 695 in the Galaxy Tab A9+ struggle with graphically intensive games like Genshin Impact?
Yes, the Snapdragon 695 is an entry-level 5G chipset. While it can handle less demanding games, Genshin Impact and similar titles will likely require significant graphical settings reductions and may still experience frame drops. The vivo Pad5e’s Snapdragon 8s Gen 3 is far better equipped for smooth gaming at higher settings.
❓ How much faster is the 44W charging on the vivo Pad5e compared to the 15W charging on the Galaxy Tab A9+?
The 44W charging on the Pad5e will significantly reduce charging times. While exact 0-100% times depend on battery capacity, expect the Pad5e to charge nearly three times faster than the A9+. This is a major convenience factor for users who frequently use their tablet throughout the day.
❓ Is the Snapdragon 8s Gen 3 in the vivo Pad5e prone to overheating during extended gaming sessions?
The Snapdragon 8s Gen 3 is a relatively efficient chip, and the 4nm process helps mitigate heat generation. While some heat is inevitable during prolonged gaming, the Pad5e is likely to manage thermals better than devices with less efficient chipsets. However, sustained peak performance may still result in some throttling.
