Compare Roborock S8 Pro Ultra Robot Vacuum and Mop vs Roborock Qrevo Slim Robot Vacuum and Mop

Reviewers wanted more included extras: one noted only an extra dust bag, another said the box lacked spare mop or HEPA filter, and one mentioned proprietary solution separately.

Accessory coverage drew a clear complaint from one reviewer because no spare mop pads were included.

The liftable brush and mop mechanisms were viewed positively because they move out of the way for mopping, carpet avoidance, and surface changes.

Design reactions were mostly positive for a sleek look, though dock styling was considered less living-room-friendly by one reviewer.

One reviewer gave the design a positive visual judgment, noting that it looked good despite the unusual no-tower layout.

The app, maps, schedules, routines, assistants, and customization were consistently praised, with minor learning-curve or finicky-map caveats.

The app, automation, AI planning, and smart features were consistently praised, though the abundance of options could feel complex.

Rug handling was mixed: mop lifting kept many rugs dry, but plush carpets, loose tassels, and high-pile edge cases remained concerns.

Area rug handling was a standout strength in TechRadar's testing, especially for thick rugs and raised thresholds.

Setup was broadly described as simple, easy, painless, or remarkably straightforward across hands-on reviews.

Setup was praised as clearly guided in the app and problem-free during testing.

One reviewer found the bin-full alert useful as part of the low-touch cleaning routine.

Battery life was generally adequate to good, with recharge-and-resume helping, but carpet boost and large runs could require recharging.

Battery and charging performance were positive, with reviewers citing 180-minute claims, strong endurance, and enough reserve for spot jobs.

The bag system worked well with official bags, but a reviewer warned that poor-fitting third-party bags could disrupt auto-emptying.

The internal bin was repeatedly criticized as small, even though the auto-empty dock reduces how often users touch it.

The water tanks were described as solid and durable in one review.

High-pile carpet pickup was above average in one test, but plush carpeting raised concerns because the fixed mop mount may still contact rugs.

High-pile carpet performance was only satisfactory, not perfect, in the one review that evaluated it directly.

Low-pile and general carpet pickup were usually strong, though one comparative test still found small debris left behind.

Low-pile carpet and smooth-floor pickup were considered adequate to good in the available testing evidence.

Medium-pile deep cleaning was mixed: one review called it above average but unimpressive, while another found the S8 Pro near the top in a flour test.

Medium-pile carpet pickup was mixed, ranging from average or spotty results to successful cleanup after stronger modes.

Clog and debris prevention was a weakness in several reviews, especially with cables, cords, and dust clumps around the rollers.

Clogging prevention was mixed because one review saw small debris clogging the robot despite other hair-wrap strengths.

Comparisons were split: some reviews rated it better than older or newer models in areas like mopping or navigation, while others preferred alternatives for value or obstacle avoidance.

Comparative performance was favorable overall, including high rankings and direct reviewer comparisons against other premium robots.

Controls and UI were a strength overall, with praise for customization and scheduling, though map editing and some settings took effort to learn.

Controls and UI were useful overall, especially voice control, but some app controls and no-mop-zone limitations made the experience less simple.

Corner performance was mixed: one reviewer praised side-brush edge and corner cleaning, while another found crumbs left near the wall.

Corner cleaning was consistently praised thanks to the extending side brush and mop arm.

Crevice pickup was weak in Vacuum Wars testing, while one review only found suction generally effective rather than exceptional in grooves.

Crevice pickup was above average in the Vacuum Wars testing evidence.

The dirty-water sensing and remopping features were praised as useful when mop pads came back especially dirty.

Dock reliability was mostly strong, especially auto-empty and self-cleaning, though one comparison criticized the S8 Pro dock design and one owner had an emptying failure.

Docking and auto-empty reliability were mostly strong, though one review recorded a one-off dock-finding failure.

Dock noise was a repeated concern; reviewers often found auto-emptying loud or startling even when normal cleaning noise was acceptable.

Dock noise was acceptable in one review, with mop washing described as unobtrusive.

Dried-on stain results ranged from excellent in Vacuum Wars mopping tests to poor in heavy yogurt/honey-style mess tests.

Dried-on stain removal was usually strong, especially with two passes or dedicated deep mopping modes.

Ease of use was a major strength, driven by automated maintenance, app control, and low-effort daily cleaning.

Ease of use was strong where reviewers praised the app experience, map editing, and simple room control.

Baseboard and edge cleaning was mixed, with strong side-brush comments from one review and missed wall-side crumbs from another.

Edge and baseboard cleaning were praised because the extending brush and mop helped reach walls, plinths, and room edges.

Edge-following accuracy was mostly good, with reviewers noting wall-hugging and precise lines, even when other navigation issues appeared.

Edge-following and navigation accuracy were generally good, with some tradeoffs or occasional abnormalities from the slim navigation design.

Auto-empty mess control was usually excellent, but one reviewer experienced dust trailing after an incomplete emptying event.

Emptying and mess control were mixed because the dock emptied debris but the process was described as noisy.

Maintenance indicators were useful, with app tracking for parts, replacement timing, and estimated wear.

Dust containment was mixed: one review found the internal bin nearly empty after auto-emptying, while another saw dust and litter left behind.

Floors generally dried quickly after mopping, and the hot-air dryer left the mop pad dry between cleanings.

The dual-roller floorhead was considered anti-climactic by Vacuum Wars because it did not translate into standout carpet deep-cleaning.

The floorhead and hardware design were credited with helping the robot perform well as a vacuum.

Some reviewers described shiny or sparkling floors after cleaning, especially when mopping worked well.

Fresh spill pickup was poor in TechRadar testing because larger wet messes were spread rather than removed cleanly.

Fresh liquid handling was a weak spot because one reviewer advised using the mop on dried stains rather than fresh spills.

Hair removal from the brush area was easier than usual because removable brush ends let tangled hair slide off.

Hair-removal channel issues were present in one test where long hairs still tangled by the end of testing.

Carpet hair pickup was good overall, including pet fur, though not always the best in class.

Carpet pet-hair pickup was above average in Vacuum Wars testing.

Hard-floor hair and dirt pickup was strong in owner-style reviews, especially for cat fur, dust, and uneven floors.

Hard-floor hair pickup was strong in the Trusted Reviews test, with complete pickup and no tangling.

Hair-tangle performance was mostly positive thanks to rubber dual rollers, though some tests still found tangles or middling rankings.

Hair-wrap resistance was usually strong, though one review still found some long hairs tangled in parts of the brush system.

Hard-floor fine-dust pickup was strong in lab-style tests, but one home test found flour smearing under certain settings.

Fine dust pickup on hard floors was generally strong, with several reviewers reporting excellent flour or fine-debris collection.

Large debris pickup on hard floors was generally good for oats, cereal, and rice, though not perfect in every test.

Large debris intake on hard floors was mostly good but not flawless, especially when oats were scattered by the side brush.

The hot-air drying element was valued for helping prevent smells, bacteria buildup, and damp mop issues.

The heated wash/dry system was praised for helping sanitize mop pads and support mopping performance.

Reviewers often framed the S8 Pro Ultra as highly advanced or innovative, though long-term and comparative reviews noted some regressions.

Innovation was a standout theme because the low-profile StarSight/ToF navigation was repeatedly described as new, effective, and competitive.

Large debris and tough mess handling was mixed: cereal and rice were easy, but concentrated spills or tough spots required manual help.

Large debris handling was mixed; the robot could collect many debris types but sometimes flicked oats out of its path.

Its height still allowed cleaning under most furniture in one review.

The low-profile design was a consistent highlight because it removed the top LiDAR tower and reached under more furniture.

Maintenance was a standout strength because the dock handles frequent tasks, though reviewers still noted occasional part cleaning and consumables.

Maintenance requirements were reduced by the dock in one review, though mop pads, bags, filters, and cleaning still require attention.

Maneuverability was mostly strong across floor types and tricky spaces, but one review reported getting stuck in odd places.

Maneuverability was a strength, with praise for raised thresholds, thick rugs, and careful movement through challenging spaces.

Mapping and path efficiency were usually excellent, fast, and accurate, but one reviewer had room-division and map-editing problems.

Mapping and path efficiency were usually strong, including fast mapping, careful navigation, and efficient room coverage.

The mop-lifting system was widely praised for keeping many carpets dry and enabling combined vacuum-mop runs, with plush rugs as the caveat.

The mop-lifting system was a strong feature for mixed hard-floor and carpet homes, though high-pile flexibility remains limited.

Mopping was generally strong for daily cleaning and light stains, but results dropped with heavy spills, tougher stains, or one-pass comparison tests.

Mopping performance was generally good to excellent for maintenance and many stains, but tougher messes sometimes required extra passes.

Cleaning noise was acceptable to good in some modes, but higher suction and dock emptying could be intrusive.

Noise was usually considered quiet or acceptable, with mopping and normal operation easier to live with than louder vacuum or dock cycles.

Obstacle avoidance drew the most mixed evidence: some tests were excellent, while others showed cords, mugs, remotes, or tight spots causing issues.

Obstacle avoidance was one of the more mixed areas, ranging from best-in-brand results to missed cords, pet mess, or low obstacles.

Odor control was a strength when the mop dryer worked, but dirty water still needed timely emptying and rinsing.

Odor control evidence was positive where the hot-air drying cycle was described as preventing mop-pad odors.

Ongoing costs were softened by generic consumables in one review, though bags, filters, and mop cloths remain required.

Overall convenience was the core strength, with reviewers repeatedly describing near-hands-off cleaning and reduced floor-care effort.

Overall cleaning convenience was a major strength thanks to the dock, app, low-maintenance routines, and reduced manual floor cleaning.

One six-month reviewer reported daily use with impressive low-touch dustbin maintenance.

Overall opinion was positive but not unanimous: most reviewers praised it as advanced and capable, while some criticized price, obstacle avoidance, or design quirks.

Overall opinion was positive across most reviews, with several reviewers calling it impressive, flexible, or a strong all-rounder.

Packaging was described as neat and protective in one unboxing review.

Pet-readiness was supported by good pet-hair pickup, pet-mode features, and reviewers with dogs or cats finding daily shedding manageable.

Pet-related evidence was mixed: reviewers liked pet monitoring and waste avoidance in some tests, but one review saw a fake pet mess hit.

Price sentiment was mixed-to-negative: reviewers called it expensive, sometimes worth it, but not always the best value against alternatives.

Value was mixed: reviewers praised the feature set for the money but repeatedly noted the high price.

Privacy was a tradeoff: losing the RGB camera and microphone eased concerns for some but removed remote monitoring.

Runtime was generally good and often around 130 minutes, though max suction, carpet boost, and large homes reduce it.

Hot-water mop washing was viewed positively for sanitizing and improving the mopping result.

Scratch resistance was a notable concern in PCMag testing after laminate scratches persisted even with a replacement mop pad.

The self-cleaning cycle was one of the strongest themes, with repeated praise for washing, drying, refilling, and auto-emptying.

The self-cleaning cycle and dock cleaning features were praised for keeping the dock or mop system cleaner with less manual work.

Software support was mixed: one issue seemed firmware-fixable and one pathing bug improved, but map transfer limitations remained.

The liquid system was useful and efficient, but reviewers noted proprietary-solution guidance, water-only use, and non-removable tank quirks.

The liquid system was capable but not complete, with reviewers noting the lack of detergent as a drawback.

The dock footprint was a drawback; reviewers repeatedly called it bigger, bulky, massive, or hard to place in small spaces.

The robot is low in height, but the dock and overall footprint were still called space-hungry.

Residue and streaking evidence was mixed: floor-direction mopping was promising, but some heavy messes smeared.

Residue and streaking were mixed, with reports of sticky residue, spread flecks, or round mop tracks after some tests.

Stuck resistance was highly split, ranging from never-stuck results to repeated cord, rug, and tight-space failures.

Stuck resistance was strong in several tests, with reviewers noting that it navigated without getting stuck or recovered well.

Suction was generally powerful in real use, but Vacuum Wars measured lower suction and airflow than expected.

Reviewers generally found real-world suction and pickup strong, though bench airflow or raw power measurements were not always top-tier.

Heavy-duty suitability was limited; reviewers found it good for daily needs but weak on larger, concentrated messes.

Heavy-duty suitability was limited; one reviewer cautioned that it saves time but should not replace a conventional vacuum.

Small-space suitability was poor mainly because the docking station is large and can be an eyesore.

Small-space suitability was only moderate because reviewers said the dock and robot footprint fit medium or larger homes better.

Reliability evidence was mixed: one reviewer found it efficient and reliable, while another felt it fell short of expectations.

Support evidence was limited and only one reviewer described Roborock service as somewhat disconnected despite resolving the issue.

Surface safety was a concern because one reviewer saw laminate scratches and advised caution with scrub intensity.

Surface safety evidence was positive where mop lifting kept rugs dry during combined vacuuming and mopping.

Tool changes were mixed: brushroll hair cleanup was easy, but changing the non-detachable mop cloth was more awkward.

Under-furniture pickup was mixed because the robot fit under most furniture but missed crumbs under low cabinets.

Under-furniture pickup was one of the clearest strengths because the low body reached areas taller robots could not.

Value-for-money was split; high automation impressed some reviewers, but comparative and price-focused reviews questioned the premium.

Value-for-money was positive within the premium category, though still tied to the high purchase price.

Versatility was strong, with reviewers praising vacuuming, mopping, combined cleaning, room modes, and multi-surface use.

Versatility was positive because reviewers highlighted adjustable modes, customizable cleaning parameters, and combined vacuum-mop operation.

The water tanks were mostly praised for capacity and ease, though the robot’s onboard tank and mop were criticized as non-removable.

Weight was a practical drawback at delivery and setup because the box was described as massive and extremely heavy.

Weight was positively noted by one reviewer as light enough to carry to another floor.