piCLASSIC™ Neo vs UR12e
Side-by-side comparison of piCLASSIC™ Neo (Piab) and UR12e (Universal Robots A/S (subsidiary of Teradyne)) — specs, pricing, Robolist Trust Score, and verified deployments. Updated daily.
 piCLASSIC™ NeocobotPiab—Trust Score |  UR12ecobotUniversal Robots A/S (subsidiary of Teradyne)—Trust Score | |
|---|---|---|
| Layer 1: Identity & Trust | ||
| Manufacturer Country (values differ) | — | DK |
| 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 | ||
| Payload (values differ) | — | 16 kg |
| Reach (values differ) | — | 1,300 mm |
| Degrees of Freedom (values differ) | — | 6 |
| Repeatability (values differ) | — | ±0.05 mm |
| Max TCP Speed (values differ) | — | 1 m/s |
| Robot Weight (values differ) | — | 33.3 kg |
| Mounting Options (values differ) | inline, floor-mounted | floor |
| IP Rating (values differ) | — | IP54 |
| Safety | ||
| Safety Rating (values differ) | — | Cat3 PLd |
| Force/Torque Sensing (values differ) | — | wrist external |
| Power/Force Limiting (values differ) | — | 5.5 N |
| Duty Cycle (values differ) | — | 24 7 continuous |
| Ease of Use | ||
| Setup Time (values differ) | — | 1 hrs |
| No-Code Capable (values differ) | — | Yes |
| Offline Programming (values differ) | — | Yes |
| Programming Interface (values differ) | — | teach_pendant, proprietary_app |
| End-Effector | ||
| Tool Flange Standard (values differ) | — | iso 9283 |
| Integrated F/T Sensor (values differ) | — | Yes |
| Wrist Power Supply (values differ) | — | 12V/24V |
| Software & Connectivity | ||
| ROS Compatible (values differ) | — | Yes |
| Fieldbus Protocols (values differ) | — | MODBUS TCP, Ethernet/IP, PROFINET |
| Commercial | ||
| Warranty (values differ) | — | 1 yrs |
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), Safety I/O Pairs, Time to Redeploy, Tool Changer Support, SDK Languages, Digital Twin Support, MTBF, Path Accuracy, Price (USD), CaaS / Month, Lead Time
best in categoryweakest in categoryvalues differ
About this comparison
piCLASSIC™ Neo vs UR12e 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.