These are some reviews of direct competitors in notebookcheck -so not some exterior site - that the reviewer of this piece did not acknowledged. Of note the final paragraphs.

www.notebookcheck.net/Xiaomi-Pad-6S-Pro-review-Versatile-12-4-inch-tablet-with-outstanding-specs.839897.0.html

www.notebookcheck.net/Honor-MagicPad-2-Tablet-Review-12-3-inch-144-Hz-OLED-price-cutter.896050.0.html

Poor review is bad for confidence on Notebookcheck.

Why for comparison is not included the direct competitor Xiaomi Pad 6S Pro that Notebookcheck reviewed this year and instead we get a comparison with an old and another class Xiaomi 6.
Why the Honor MagicPad 2 that was reviewed a couples of weeks ago is not included in comparison but an old Lenovo P12 is?

Why it is not stated clearly what is the SDR brightness and we have an evasive text that when bright light the HDR goes to 800+?
The brightness for Xiaomi Pad 6S pro is said to be 810 nits in white background, so why the lack of consistency, with different references like this it is impossible to compare...

Noteboocheck can do better.

I don't understand why NBC skipped the Iqoo Pad 2 Pro or Vivo Pad 3 Pro tablet.

A review of them is essential, as these tablets surpass the OnePlus Pad 2, Honor MagicPad 2 12.3", and iPad Air M2 in several aspects.  They boast a Dimensity 9300+ chipset, a 13-inch display with 900 nits brightness, UFS 4.0 storage, USB-C 3.2 connectivity, a 144Hz refresh rate screen, and an 11,500 mAh battery.  Additionally, OriginOS offers seamless connectivity with macOS and Windows systems.

Why didn´t you test benchmarks as geekbench 6 with performance mode enabled.
I always run it with performance mode enabled and it scores like other snapdragon 8 gen 3