Roborock S6 MaxV vs Dyson 360 Eye

The Roborock S6 MaxV is a great Robot Vacuum for its $749 asking price.

The Dyson 360 Eye, however, while a reasonable product for $1699, doesn't stack up against its competitors quite as well. If you're considering Robot Vacuums in the $1,700 range, you might want to check out some better options.

The Roborock S6 MaxV was loved by reviewers at Tom's Guide, a highly trusted source that performs reliable in-depth testing. It did great in its "Best robot mops" roundup where it was named its "Best for obstacle detection while cleaning", which, in itself, makes it a product worth considering.

Moving on to the Dyson 360 Eye: it was unable to reach the very top of any roundups from sources that conduct reliable and unbiased testing. Nonetheless, it still managed to impress reviewers from a number of such sites, like Expert Reviews, Techradar, CNET, PCmag, slashgear.com, and inews.co.uk, enough for them to include them on those lists.

Out of the sources that tested and rated both of these Robot Vacuums, Techradar, Top Ten Reviews, and slashgear.com preferred the Roborock S6 MaxV, whereas reviewers at Pocket-lint liked the Dyson 360 Eye better. PCmag gave them identical review scores.

We also took a look at which sources liked these products best - the highest Roborock S6 MaxV rating came from Modern Castle, whereas the Dyson 360 Eye most impressed reviewers at Pocket-lint; they earned scores of 9.5 and 10, respectively.

Lastly, we averaged out all of the reviews scores that we could find on these two products and compared them to other Robot Vacuums on the market. We learned that both of them performed far better than most of their competitors - the overall review average earned by Robot Vacuums being 7.2 out of 10, whereas the Roborock S6 MaxV and Dyson 360 Eye managed averages of 8.1 and 7.8 points, respectively.

Due to the difference in their prices, however, it's important to keep in mind that a direct Roborock S6 MaxV vs. Dyson 360 Eye comparison might not be entirely fair - some sources don't take value for money into account when assigning their scores and therefore have a tendency to rate more premium products better.