A0912s vs piCLASSIC™ Neo
Side-by-side comparison of A0912s (Doosan Robotics Inc.) and piCLASSIC™ Neo (Piab) — specs, pricing, Robolist Trust Score, and verified deployments. Updated daily.
 A0912scobotDoosan Robotics Inc.—Trust Score |  piCLASSIC™ NeocobotPiab—Trust Score | |
|---|---|---|
| Layer 1: Identity & Trust | ||
| Manufacturer Country (values differ) | KR | — |
| Year First Available (values differ) | 2015 | 2025 |
| Verified Deployments | 0 Deployments | 0 Deployments |
| Layer 2: Operational | ||
| Availability Status | ACTIVE | ACTIVE |
| Layer 3: Category Specific | ||
| Arm Mechanics | ||
| Payload (values differ) | 9 kg | — |
| Reach (values differ) | 1,200 mm | — |
| Degrees of Freedom (values differ) | 6 | — |
| Repeatability (values differ) | ±0.1 mm | — |
| Max TCP Speed (values differ) | 1 m/s | — |
| Robot Weight (values differ) | 27 kg | — |
| Mounting Options (values differ) | floor, tabletop | flush mounting, direct mount, End-of-Arm-Tooling |
| IP Rating (values differ) | IP54 | — |
| Safety | ||
| Safety Rating (values differ) | PL e Cat 4 | CE |
| Force/Torque Sensing (values differ) | Yes | — |
| Duty Cycle (values differ) | — | 24 7 continuous |
| Ease of Use | ||
| Setup Time (values differ) | 1 hrs | — |
| No-Code Capable (values differ) | — | Yes |
| Programming Interface (values differ) | drag_and_drop, no_code_gui | — |
| End-Effector | ||
| Tool Changer Support (values differ) | — | manual |
| Integrated F/T Sensor (values differ) | — | Yes |
| Wrist Power Supply (values differ) | — | compressed air |
| Software & Connectivity | ||
| ROS Compatible (values differ) | Yes | No |
| Fieldbus Protocols (values differ) | Ethernet/IP, Profinet | — |
| Digital Twin Support (values differ) | — | Yes |
| Commercial | ||
| Warranty (values differ) | 2 yrs | — |
| Lead Time (values differ) | 4 wks | — |
Insufficient data for full comparison
The following fields had no data for any of the selected robots: Price Range (USD), Battery / Shift Runtime, TCP Speed (Collaborative), Power/Force Limiting, Safety I/O Pairs, Time to Redeploy, Offline Programming, Tool Flange Standard, SDK Languages, MTBF, Path Accuracy, Price (USD), CaaS / Month
best in categoryweakest in categoryvalues differ
About this comparison
A0912s vs piCLASSIC™ Neo compares two robots in the cobot category. All data is sourced from manufacturer spec sheets, verified deployments, and third-party filings; see our methodology for how the Robolist Trust Score is calculated.