Roomba 507 vs QX Revo: Which Fits Your Floors?

Choose the Roborock QX Revo for mostly clear hard floors, where testing of its Q Revo counterpart provides stronger evidence of everyday cleaning performance. Consider the Roomba Plus 507 Combo for its extending edge mop, but do not mistake its longer feature list for a measured cleaning victory.

Skip to the picks

Neither deserves a blanket avoid recommendation. The decision turns on edge reach, the clutter you leave behind, and how much maintenance you expect the dock to eliminate.

These are documented features, not comparative test results. Sources: iRobot’s 507 specifications, Roborock’s QX Revo specifications, and RTINGS’ model comparison.

Check the suffix before comparing either robot

This comparison covers the original QX Revo, which Roborock specifies at 5,500 Pa. A listing called QX Revo Plus or QX Revo Ultra describes a different product; do not apply this verdict simply because its name starts the same way. Roborock QX Revo specifications

RTINGS identifies the original QX Revo as a Costco bundle variant of the Q Revo, supplied with additional consumables. Its review unit was the ordinary Q Revo, not the QX package. That makes those measurements relevant evidence for the underlying design, while preserving the distinction between a tested robot and its bundle variant. RTINGS’ tested model and variants

If you are shopping on Amazon, the original Roborock Q Revo is the corresponding model name to search. Check the complete robot-and-dock package and its condition; an accessory set mentioning QX Revo is not the vacuum. Similarly, a Roomba Plus 505 listing should not silently be presented as the exact 507 package.

Clear hard floors favor the QX Revo

Best Cordless Vacuum Guide measured 99.75% average hard-floor debris pickup with the Q Revo. Its separate embedded-sand carpet test returned 76.35%. Those results support a specific recommendation: the original Q Revo design makes more sense for routine crumbs and grit on hard flooring than as your only tool for deep carpet cleaning. Best Cordless Vacuum Guide’s Q Revo measurements

The difference between those tests matters more than a suction headline. Surface debris and dirt worked into carpet fibers are different cleaning jobs. A high result for one does not promise the same result for the other.

There is no independently measured, exact-model 507-versus-QX head-to-head in the sources reviewed here. The QX recommendation is therefore an editorial judgment based on documented platform performance, not proof that it removes more dirt than the 507 in identical conditions.

The Roomba’s advertised 70× suction also cannot settle this comparison: iRobot’s footnote compares it with Roomba 600-series robots, not the QX Revo. That multiplier and Roborock’s pressure specification use different reference points. iRobot’s suction claim and footnote

Wall-edge mopping gives the Roomba a reason to win

The 507’s meaningful advantage is mechanical: its mop extends outward. iRobot’s 18% coverage improvement is relative to its own unextended mop pad, not a measured 18% advantage over Roborock. iRobot’s PerfectEdge specification

Choose the 507 when the strip beside kitchen cabinets and skirting boards is a recurring reason you still mop manually. Its extending pad addresses that particular reach limitation. It does not establish that the robot scrubs every stain better, reaches every corner, or vacuums carpets more effectively.

The original QX Revo gets this wrong for readers prioritizing wall-edge mopping: its fixed mop arrangement lacks the extending arm needed to follow that edge as closely. That is a reason to choose the Roomba for this use case, rather than a reason to reject the QX for an open kitchen floor.

Pets and thick rugs weaken the easy recommendation

RTINGS found that the Q Revo struggled with pet hair embedded in carpet and with detecting small obstacles. Its ability to navigate a mapped room should therefore not be confused with reliable avoidance of everything dropped onto that floor. RTINGS’ carpet and obstacle findings

The 507 offers camera-based object recognition, but the sources reviewed do not establish an exact-model detection success rate. Neither robot should be bought on an assumption that it will reliably avoid every cable or pet accident.

For rugs, Roborock specifies 7 mm of mop lift on the original Q Revo platform. That is a mechanism’s travel distance, not a guarantee that wet pads clear every rug. Roborock’s Q Revo technical sheet

The QX manual explicitly allows carpets to be marked as no-go zones. Use that option when keeping a rug dry matters more than cleaning both surfaces in one run. For a carpet-heavy home with embedded pet hair, the evidence here is insufficient to declare either robot a complete replacement for a separate vacuum. Roborock QX Revo owner’s manual

The dock does not remove weekly maintenance

The Roomba Plus 507 is the wrong choice if its automation claims lead you to expect months without attention: its manual calls for filter cleaning weekly, or twice weekly with pets, plus weekly main-brush cleaning. It also states that pad drying can take several hours. Roomba Plus 507 owner’s guide

Roborock’s QX manual specifies filter cleaning every two weeks, with 24 hours of drying before reinstallation. Its dock still requires dirty-water disposal and cleaning. Neither automatic dust emptying nor automatic pad washing makes these owner tasks disappear. Roborock QX Revo maintenance instructions

Before ordering, identify the task you most want to stop doing. For routine pickup across clear hard floors, choose the QX Revo or its original Q Revo counterpart. For manually mopping the strip beside cabinets, consider the 507. For unattended cleaning around pet accidents or demanding carpet extraction, neither has enough supporting evidence here to earn that promise.