EYE+ vs piCLASSIC™ Neo
Side-by-side comparison of EYE+ (Asyril) and piCLASSIC™ Neo (Piab) — specs, pricing, Robolist Trust Score, and verified deployments. Updated daily.
 EYE+cobotAsyril—Trust Score |  piCLASSIC™ NeocobotPiab—Trust Score | |
|---|---|---|
| Layer 1: Identity & Trust | ||
| Year First Available (values differ) | — | 2025 |
| Verified Deployments | 0 Deployments | 0 Deployments |
| Layer 2: Operational | ||
| Availability Status | ACTIVE | ACTIVE |
| Layer 3: Category Specific | ||
| Arm Mechanics | ||
| Robot Weight (values differ) | 1.3 kg | — |
| Mounting Options (values differ) | — | inline, floor-mounted |
| Ease of Use | ||
| Programming Interface (values differ) | no_code_gui | — |
| Software & Connectivity | ||
| Fieldbus Protocols (values differ) | EtherCAT, EtherNet/IP, PROFINET | — |
Insufficient data for full comparison
The following fields had no data for any of the selected robots: Manufacturer Country, Price Range (USD), Battery / Shift Runtime, Payload, Reach, Degrees of Freedom, Repeatability, Max TCP Speed, IP Rating, Safety Rating, Force/Torque Sensing, TCP Speed (Collaborative), Power/Force Limiting, Safety I/O Pairs, Duty Cycle, Setup Time, Time to Redeploy, No-Code Capable, Offline Programming, Tool Flange Standard, Tool Changer Support, Integrated F/T Sensor, Wrist Power Supply, SDK Languages, ROS Compatible, Digital Twin Support, MTBF, Path Accuracy, Price (USD), CaaS / Month, Warranty, Lead Time
About this comparison
EYE+ 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.