eufy Robot Vacuum Omni S1 Pro

4.2

(8)

Bottom Line

Choose the eufy Omni S1 Pro if you want top-tier hard-floor mopping and strong obstacle avoidance; Skip it if your home is mostly carpet or you hate extra dirty-water upkeep.

Best for

Homes with mostly hard floors that care more about real mopping results (dried stains and wet mess control) than deep carpet extraction, especially if you want a robot that usually avoids babysitting around clutter.

Not for

Mostly carpeted homes, deep-clean carpet expectations, or households with lots of long hair where you want near-zero tangles and minimal extra maintenance tied to dirty-water handling.

Verdict

The eufy Omni S1 Pro stands out for hard floors because its roller mop continuously refreshes with clean water and pulls dirty liquid into an onboard tank, which helps it scrub stubborn dried stains and reduce streaking compared with pad-style mops. Multiple reviews also praise its navigation efficiency and obstacle avoidance, plus a highly automated dock that washes and dries the roller and auto-empties debris. The tradeoff is clear: deep carpet cleaning is consistently reported as below average, and high-pile rugs can be a weak spot for reliability and performance. Expect a bit more maintenance than typical bots due to dirty-water and filter-related care.

Pros

Fresh Liquid Pickup Speed 5.0 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 1 review 5.0

Fresh liquid pickup speed and wet-mess handling are described as unusually strong for a robot mop because it actively processes dirty water instead of saturating pads and streaking.
Mopping performance 4.9 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 8 reviews 4.9

Mopping performance is the defining strength: the roller system with continuous washing is repeatedly described as best-in-class for hard floors, especially for real scrubbing and cleaner results over a run.
Self-cleaning cycle 4.8 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 1 review 4.8

Self-cleaning is frequently praised: roller washing at the dock and in-use mop refreshing are described as leaving the roller cleaner with minimal buildup after messy tests.
Streaking / Residue 4.8 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 3 reviews 4.8

Streaking and residue are generally reported as reduced versus spinning-pad competitors, with multiple reviewers noting cleaner-feeling floors and less smear in messy mopping scenarios.
Under-Furniture Pickup 4.8 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 2 reviews 4.8

Under-furniture pickup is frequently praised due to the lower-profile navigation design that improves access beneath sofas, cabinets, and other low-clearance areas.
Dried-On Stain Removal 4.7 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 7 reviews 4.7

Dried-on stain removal is frequently highlighted as exceptional in testing (coffee, grape juice, mud, sauces), with the S1 Pro often ranking at or near the top among premium robot mop combos.
Low-profile design 4.7 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 3 reviews 4.7

Low-profile navigation hardware (front/internal lidar approach) is repeatedly credited for better under-furniture access than taller, top-turret designs.
Aesthetic design & finish 4.7 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 4 reviews 4.7

Design is consistently praised as futuristic and standout, with both the robot and dock described as premium-looking compared to more traditional competitors.
Hard Floor — Large Debris Intake 4.7 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 2 reviews 4.7

Large debris intake on hard floors is commonly described as very good, with reviewers noting strong pickup from fine debris through larger particles.
Map & Path Efficiency (Robot Vacuums) 4.6 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 3 reviews 4.6

Mapping and path efficiency are widely described as strong, with fast mapping, reliable room handling, and efficient coverage in typical home layouts.
Hard Floor — Fine Dust Pickup 4.6 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 2 reviews 4.6

Hard-floor fine dust pickup is generally reported as strong, with multiple tests placing hard-floor vacuuming near the top of comparison groups.
Bin & Bag 4.6 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 4 reviews 4.6

Dust handling is generally strong with an auto-empty dock and disposable bag system, though the robot-side bin can be described as small and performance can vary in extreme clogging simulations.
Solution / Liquid system 4.6 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 6 reviews 4.6

Solution/liquid handling is a differentiator: multiple reviews describe onboard clean/dirty water handling and dock detergent/solution features that improve hygiene and reduce smear compared to pad systems.
Docking & Auto-Empty Reliability (Robot) 4.6 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 4 reviews 4.6

Docking and auto-empty behavior are usually reliable in the provided reviews, with consistent emptying reported, plus integrated mop washing and drying that reduce daily hands-on work.
Obstacle Avoidance (Robot) 4.5 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5 reviews 4.5

Obstacle avoidance is repeatedly rated among the best, including reports of near-perfect or perfect results in structured tests, though cord/shoelace edge cases can still cause tangles.
Build quality & durability 4.5 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 1 review 4.5

Build quality impressions are positive, with the dock and robot repeatedly described as well put together and thoughtfully designed, though long-term durability is not deeply proven in the provided reviews.
AI, Smart & App / Automation 4.3 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 4 reviews 4.3

The app is generally considered easy and functional for scheduling, maps, and no-go zones, but some reviewers call it lighter on advanced options than certain competitors.
Mop lifting system 4.3 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 4 reviews 4.3

Mop lifting is above average and often keeps carpets dry, but at least one review suggests software behavior could be improved for tricky transitions and carpet-edge situations.
Battery & Charging 4.3 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 2 reviews 4.3
Area Rug Handling 4.1 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 1 review 4.1

Area rug handling is generally good for clearing smaller rugs when the mop lifts properly, but edge cases on thicker/high-pile rugs can cause issues or require no-mop zones.
Suction & Airflow 4.1 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 4 reviews 4.1

Suction is often described as strong on paper and good in some pickup tests, but several reviews still place overall carpet performance behind competing flagships despite decent hard-floor results.
Privacy controls 4.0 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 3 reviews 4.0

Privacy-related notes are mixed: the robot uses camera-based avoidance, but at least one review highlights limited or no live-view access, which some may see as a privacy-positive constraint.
Corner Cleaning (Robot) 4.0 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 2 reviews 4.0

Corner cleaning is helped by the general design and dual side brushes in some descriptions, but at least one reviewer notes it can intentionally keep distance from walls/furniture, reducing true corner reach.
Noise level 3.8 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 1 review 3.8

Robot noise is generally in a typical range for a premium robot vacuum, with louder output at maximum power settings and more tolerable sound on standard modes.
Price & Value 3.8 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 2 reviews 3.8

Value is framed as good relative to some pricier flagships, but still expensive overall; reviewers tend to justify it primarily for buyers who prioritize hard-floor mopping performance.
Dock noise 3.7 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 2 reviews 3.7

Dock-related noise is described as noticeable during drying and auto-empty events, with some reviewers calling the drying sounds more present than they prefer in the same room.
Maintenance requirements 3.7 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 2 reviews 3.7

Maintenance needs are moderate-to-high for a flagship robot because the dirty-water system and certain filters may require more frequent attention than simpler pad-based bots.
Storage footprint & upright-stand stability 3.6 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 1 review 3.6

Dock footprint is generally viewed as well-designed and ergonomic, but at least one review notes the base can be heavy and less convenient to move.

Cons

Carpet — High-Pile Pickup 3.4 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 1 review 3.4

High-pile carpet handling is a weaker area: some reports note getting stuck or requiring extra caution with longer pile rugs, and deep cleaning remains a consistent con.
Edge & Baseboard Cleaning (Hard Floors) 3.3 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 3 reviews 3.3

Edge and baseboard cleaning is a known compromise: several reviews mention a measurable gap to walls/baseboards and less aggressive edge mopping compared with some rivals.
Carpet — Medium-Pile Pickup 3.2 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 3 reviews 3.2

Medium-pile carpet results are mixed: surface pickup can be decent, but deep-clean performance and embedded debris extraction are repeatedly described as below average for its class.
Hair Pickup — Hard Floors 3.2 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 1 review 3.2

Hair pickup on hard floors is generally described as good, though not always the best in multi-brand shootouts depending on the specific hair test used.
Hair‑Wrap / Tangle Resistance 3.1 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 2 reviews 3.1

Tangle resistance is not a standout: some reviews mention notable hair wrap and the lack of certain detangling mechanisms found on other models, even if it does not always stop the robot.
Hair Pickup — Carpets 3.0 ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 1 review 3.0

Hair pickup on carpets is mixed to below average in at least one comparative test, with some reviewers noting it struggles more than top competitors in certain pet-hair simulations.

FAQ

Is the Omni S1 Pro actually better at mopping than spinning pads?

Across the reviews provided, the roller system is repeatedly described as a step up for hard floors because it keeps the mop cleaner during the run and is notably strong on dried-on stains with less streaking.

How is it on carpets?

It is generally described as fine for surface debris but weak for deep carpet extraction, and some reviews recommend skipping it if carpet is your main flooring.

Does it handle wet spills well?

Yes. Multiple reviewers highlight that the roller plus onboard dirty-water handling makes it unusually capable for wet messes compared with pad-based robot mops.

How much maintenance does it need compared with typical robot mop combos?

Expect typical dock upkeep (clean/dirty water changes) plus some added attention related to the robot's dirty-water path and filters, since the system actively collects dirty liquid during mopping.

Where did these scores come from?

They were generated only from the attached review transcripts in the provided reviews.json file.