Compare iRobot Roomba Combo i5 Robot Vacuum vs Roborock S8 MaxV Ultra Robot Vacuum and Mop

Accessory feedback was limited but positive, with one reviewer appreciating the included extra replacement filter.

The included command card was described positively as a useful reference for Rocky voice commands.

Design impressions were positive, with reviewers calling the robot attractive, handsome, and sleek.

Design impressions were strongly positive, with reviewers praising the aesthetics of both the robot and dock.

Smart features and app control were widely praised for scheduling, room control, voice control, geofencing, and a simple app, but reviewers noted missing AI detection.

Smart features and automation were a highlight, including top feature scoring, integrations, app reliability, and rich customization.

Rug handling was mixed: it handled tassels and carpets well while vacuuming, but mopping lacks rug-aware avoidance.

Area-rug handling was strong in reviews that praised carpet/rug settings and hard-floor/rug cleaning behavior.

Setup was mostly easy or a breeze, with one unboxing reviewer adding that the initial setup was a little slow.

Setup was consistently easy, with reviewers describing app pairing, assembly, and first setup as straightforward.

Charging behavior was positive because the robot can return home, recharge, and continue cleaning.

Battery evidence was middling: one test reached 101 minutes before returning to charge, behind some high-end competitors.

The bin was praised as easy to remove and empty, with reviewers noting a sizable container and one-handed emptying.

The dust bag system was viewed as a major convenience, with self-emptying described as the preferred approach.

Build quality was praised directly as super solid, with a durable-looking body after use.

Build/design detail was praised, with one reviewer saying the small details felt carefully considered.

High-pile/deep-pile carpet pickup was praised strongly in Lifehacker's home testing.

Medium/generic carpet pickup was mixed-to-good: comparative tests showed good but not class-leading pickup, including flour/sand limitations.

Child and pet lock was positively received as useful for homes with kids or pets bumping buttons.

Debris-prevention evidence was positive but qualified: it could keep working through small foreign objects, though rollers still sometimes needed clearing.

Comparative performance was favorable against the 694 but less compelling as an upgrade over i3-class hardware.

Comparative performance was mixed: it topped one 2024 scorecard, but another Roborock-only test favored cheaper models overall.

Controls and UI were generally easy to use, though one reviewer found the feature set basic and another wanted more options.

Controls and UI were broadly liked for intuitive apps and rich options, though Rocky and remote video had wording and quality limits.

Cord management was criticized because the dock cord had no tidy routing.

Cord management was praised because the dock provided a neat place to wrap the cord.

Corner cleaning was supported by hands-on mopping/cleaning coverage where the robot avoided missing areas.

Corner cleaning was largely positive thanks to edge-reaching arms and carpet-corner performance.

Docking reliability was praised by one long-use reviewer who said the robot finished jobs and returned to the dock.

Auto-empty reliability was a weak spot in one comparative test, where debris remained in the robot after emptying.

Dock noise was a drawback because drying noise was noticeable and louder than one household wanted nearby.

Dried-on stain evidence was strong in Lifehacker's use, though stubborn stains could still require an extra pass.

Ease of use was very strong overall, from simple mapping and maintenance cleaning to quick room cleaning and few missed spots.

Ease of use was strongly positive, with owner-style reviewers calling it a pleasure and praising the app.

Edge and baseboard cleaning was praised, including Consumer Reports-style edge performance and hands-on edge coverage.

Hard-floor edge/baseboard cleaning was split: some reviewers praised edge reach, while one ketchup test left cabinet-edge residue.

Edge-following accuracy was praised through straight-line cleaning and careful route consistency.

Edge-following accuracy was only moderate: it avoided wall impacts well but still created baseboard brush marks.

Emptying and mess control was easy and low-friction, with one-handed emptying and simple lever-based bin removal.

Emptying and mess control was mixed: a comparative test left debris in the bin, but the bagged self-emptying system was praised for convenience.

Dust containment was praised because the self-emptying bag seals dust after removal, useful for sensitive sinuses.

The dual-roller floorhead drew positive carpet feedback, especially for making carpet look clean and brushed.

Floorhead design had a notable flaw in PCMag's mopping stress test because brush lifting did not work effectively.

Floor shine was described as a light-touch benefit when using water, but not as a deep-cleaning result.

Hair-removal channel behavior improved over a prior S8 but still sometimes required roller clearing.

Carpet hair pickup was rated positively through pet-hair performance and the cleaning system's carpet effectiveness.

Carpet pet-hair pickup was strong in the comparative test, leaving only a single dense clump.

Hard-floor hair pickup evidence was positive, especially around pet and human hair in mixed-floor homes.

Hard-floor hair pickup was positive in the pet-home review, where the S8 avoided clump-leaving issues seen on another robot.

Hair-wrap resistance was one of the strongest areas, with reviewers praising painless roller hair removal and anti-tangling performance.

Hair-wrap resistance was the biggest cleaning weakness, with one test stopping the robot and another Roborock comparison ranking it poorly, despite PCMag's better experience.

Hard-floor fine dust pickup was praised, including top bare-floor marks and visible fine dirt and dust in the bin.

Fine-dust hard-floor pickup was inconsistent: one test was decent, PCMag found poor relative performance, and Lifehacker was impressed in home use.

Large hard-floor debris handling was mixed, with one broad test positive but PCMag reporting rice and sand scatter.

Headlights were noted as useful during dark-area cleaning and navigation.

The dock heating systems were praised through hot-air drying that helped prevent musty odors, supporting a high heating-element score.

Innovation feedback was mixed to negative because reviewers saw missing advanced features and little hardware upgrade versus related models.

Innovation evidence was positive where the extending edge arms were described as a major leap forward for reaching walls and toe kicks.

Kid-friendliness was supported by one reviewer who said it made life easier in a home with a toddler.

Large debris handling was positive, with a reviewer reporting that larger objects could be picked up alongside fine dust and dirt.

Large-debris handling was positive in Lifehacker's experience because the robot could keep working after encountering foreign objects.

Low-profile design was praised for being easy to hide and for fitting under tables, furniture, and beds.

Low-profile design was limited by size; it could not fit between chair legs that a smaller robot could.

Maintenance was mixed: washable pads and hair-checking were manageable, but one reviewer stressed pre-run tidying and routine upkeep.

Maintenance requirements were favorable overall, with long water-change intervals and less intervention than many robots.

Navigation and handling were praised across several reviews for methodical movement, accurate furniture navigation, and slowing down before obstacles.

Mapping and path efficiency were standout strengths, with reviewers praising accurate mapping, room-by-room control, rows, and simultaneous mapping while vacuuming.

Mapping and pathing were generally excellent, with app maps, room editing, and self-location all praised.

Mop lifting was a weakness because one reviewer noted the i5 is not smart enough to avoid mopping rugs.

Mop lifting was a standout strength, especially in the comparative test where it kept high-pile carpet dry.

Mopping was mixed: convenient and useful for maintenance, but repeatedly described as basic, surface-level, or short of a deep mop.

Mopping performance was highly mixed across tests, from weak dried-mud/jelly results to excellent everyday and stubborn-stain performance.

Noise feedback was mixed: one review found it typical for a robovac and another valued shorter run time, but several users called it noisy or very loud on hard floors.

Noise feedback was acceptable but not silent: one Roborock comparison ranked it well, while another said it was not loud but disruptive for calls.

Obstacle avoidance was mixed: some reviewers saw bumping, while another praised slowing before contact.

Obstacle avoidance was sharply split, ranging from flawless and best-in-test to PCMag's repeated obstacle impacts.

Odor control was praised through detergent dispensing and hot-air drying that reduce bacterial growth and musty smells.

Consumable cost evidence was mildly positive because six dust bags per year was not seen as excessive.

Overall cleaning convenience was praised for reducing effort, helping maintain the home, and making day-to-day life easier.

Overall cleaning convenience was very strong, with reviewers emphasizing reduced hands-on floor cleaning.

Durability evidence was positive after use, with one reviewer noting the robot avoided beating itself up and still looked nearly new.

Longevity evidence was favorable from an eight-month user who still repeatedly recommended the robot.

Overall opinion was broadly favorable, including top-list praise, high-rated robovac language, repeated recommendations, and a 4.4-star owner-style rating.

Overall opinion ranged from cautious to glowing, but most reviews treated it as a highly capable flagship with price and performance tradeoffs.

Pet-related feedback was mostly positive for pet hair and hair-tangle resistance, though one reviewer noted pet-waste avoidance is better on the j9 line.

Pet-related evidence was mostly favorable: reviewers liked pet-finding, pet-waste options, and pet-hair pickup, though not every pet interaction was perfect.

Value was repeatedly praised at its sale or category price, though one reviewer noted the non-plus model lacks self-emptying at the same general market tier.

Value was divisive and often price-sensitive: several reviewers criticized the flagship price, while value was defended only when performance and convenience justified it.

Privacy controls were praised for onboard processing, disabled-by-default remote video, camera-password controls, and audible remote-view alerts.

Runtime was mixed to weak: one review found it below average and another said double-pass cleaning drained the battery quickly.

Runtime was acceptable but not exceptional in PCMag's test, ending at 101 minutes before recharge.

Surface safety feedback was positive, with reviewers saying it was not damaging surfaces and varied carpet line directions to avoid harm.

Scratch resistance was a concern in one comparative test because the side brushes left swirl marks on white baseboards.

Self-cleaning performance was one of the strongest areas, with praise for hot-water washing, auto detergent, dock cleaning, and mop care.

Software support was framed positively as a way the product could improve through updates without user effort.

Apple Home/Matter support was described as a positive step, though the Roborock app remained the deeper control center.

Liquid-system feedback was mixed: reviewers appreciated simple water or solution use, but one warned excess solution could leak onto floors.

The cleaning-solution system was praised for convenience and for improving mop performance.

Storage footprint feedback was positive because reviewers liked the sleek base and the ability to keep the robot out of sight.

Streaking was noted as a mild mopping issue in one hands-on hard-floor test.

Residue control was mixed: one comparative mop test left sticky floors, while PCMag found only limited jelly spread.

Stuck resistance was strong in hands-on reports, especially around rug tassels and during longer whole-room jobs.

Stuck resistance was mixed: PCMag said the second unit did not get stuck, but obstacle struggles still remained.

Reviewers consistently rated vacuum pickup highly, citing strong suction, good vacuuming results, a 90/100 deep-cleaning score, and carpet suction that helped the rollers clean effectively.

Reviewers praised the jump in suction and premium cleaning power, with especially strong language from long-term and detailed-use reviews.

Heavy-duty suitability was limited, with reviewers saying it should not be relied on for heavy messes or solid deep cleaning.

Heavy-duty suitability was favorable where reviewers cited strong combined vacuuming and mopping performance.

Small-space suitability was weak because its size kept it from fitting between dining-chair legs that a smaller competitor could handle.

Reliability was praised by one long-use reviewer who said the robot consistently finished jobs and returned to the dock.

Reliability evidence was strong in owner-style reviews, including repeated recommendation and confidence based on Roborock experience.

Surface safety with attachments was positive where reviewers said the robot's carpet-line pattern helped avoid harm.

Surface safety evidence was mixed: PCMag saw no scratching on hard floors, but another test reported side-brush swirl marks on white baseboards.

Tool and bin changes were described as simple, with the mop pad staying attached well and one reviewer saying the bin could be reinserted almost blindfolded.

Tool-change simplicity had a notable drawback because PCMag listed the non-detachable mop cloth mount as a con.

Under-furniture pickup was a strength, with reviewers praising table, entertainment-center, and low-profile under-bed access.

Under-furniture pickup was praised where the Flexi-arms reached under toe kicks and nearby items that older edge brushes missed.

Value-for-money was strong, with reviewers calling the value real and recommending the extra spend over cheaper models.

Value-for-money was mixed-to-positive: one guide called it exceptional, while another saw the price as fair only if affordable.

Versatility was a major strength, with reviewers praising mixed-floor suitability and the convenience of vacuuming and mopping at the same time.

Versatility evidence was favorable because reviewers highlighted the broad configurability of cleaning modes and zones.

Water tank feedback was modest, with one reviewer saying the tank system was not huge.

The clean-water tank was easy to remove and handle, supporting a positive water-tank usability score.

Weight feedback was neutral-to-positive: the robot felt substantial but not overly heavy in handling.