Expedition A3 vs Figure
Expedition A3 is a humanoid robot by AGIBOT (China); Figure comes from Figure AI (United States). Expedition A3 is taller at 175 cm, against 168 cm for Figure. Figure is heavier: 60 kg versus 55 kg for Expedition A3. Expedition A3 has more degrees of freedom (49 against 30). Expedition A3 is in pilot deployments, while Figure is a prototype. Listed prices: $45,000 for Expedition A3 and $130,000 for Figure.
Add up to two more robots or show only the rows that differ.
| Spec |   🇨🇳 ChinaPilot |   🇺🇸 United StatesPrototype |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Year | ||
| Year | 2026 | 2025 |
| Body | ||
| Height | ||
| Height | 175 cm | 168 cm |
| Weight | ||
| Weight | 55 kg | 60 kg |
| Degrees of freedom | ||
| Degrees of freedom | 49 | 30 |
| DoF (hands) | ||
| DoF (hands) | 125 | 20 |
| Fingers | ||
| Fingers | 5 | 10 |
| Structural material | ||
| Structural material | Aerospace-grade Aluminum / Carbon Fiber | Battery enclosure uses stamped steel, die-cast aluminum, and structural adhesives |
| Color | ||
| Color | Silver / Black / White | - |
| Motion | ||
| Max speed | ||
| Max speed | 7 km/h | 4.3 km/h |
| Walking speed | ||
| Walking speed | 7 km/h | 4.3 km/h |
| Strength | ||
| Strength | 10 kg | 20 kg |
| Runtime | ||
| Runtime | 8 h | 5 h |
| Motor tech | ||
| Motor tech | PowerFlow Integrated Joint (Quasi-direct drive) | Frameless BLDC-motors |
| Gear tech | ||
| Gear tech | Planetary Reducers (< 10 ratio) | Strain-wave (harmonic) and/or cycloidal |
| Sensing & Compute | ||
| CPU / GPU | ||
| CPU / GPU | 200 TOPS AI Computing Power | Helix runs entirely on-board on dual low-power embedded GPUs |
| Operating system | ||
| Operating system | AimRT Framework / Linux-based | Ubuntu Linux (LTS) + RT-komponenter |
| LLM integration | ||
| LLM integration | WorkGPT (Multimodal Large Model) | Helix uses an open-source, open-weight VLM for high-level reasoning |
| Camera | ||
| Camera | RGB-D Cameras + Fisheye Cameras | 03 introduces a new vision system with 2× frame rate, ¼ latency, and +60% FoV per camera, plus palm cameras in each hand. |
| Connectivity | ||
| Connectivity | 5G, Ethernet, Wi‑Fi | 10 Gbps mmWave data offload; wireless inductive charging and data offload |
| Latency (glass → action) | ||
| Latency (glass → action) | Low-latency | No numeric “glass-to-action” latency published. Site notes ¼ camera latency vs. prior architecture and 200 Hz low-level control |
| Safety & Market | ||
| Safe with humans | ||
| Safe with humans | Yes | - |
| Primary market | ||
| Primary market | Commercial Service, Entertainment, retail | Home service, Industries |
| Country | ||
| Country | China | United States |
| Availability | ||
| Availability | Pilot | Prototype |
| Price | ||
| Price | $ 45 000 | $ 130 000 |
| Verified facts | ||
| Deployments | ||
| Deployments | 1 | 1 |
| Production records | ||
| Production records | - | 1 |
| All reviewed facts | ||
| All reviewed facts | 2 | 11 |
Counts of reviewed facts with sources. Open a robot page to see each fact and its links.
More comparisons
Expedition A3 vs OptimusAGIBOT · Tesla
Apollo vs Expedition A3Apptronik · AGIBOT
Atlas vs Expedition A3Boston Dynamics · AGIBOT
Expedition A3 vs RAISE A1AGIBOT · AGIBOT
Expedition A3 vs NEOAGIBOT · 1X Technologies
Expedition A3 vs H1AGIBOT · Unitree Robotics- Figure vs OptimusFigure AI · Tesla
Figure vs IRONFigure AI · XPENG