Expedition A3 vs NEO
Expedition A3 is a humanoid robot by AGIBOT (China); NEO comes from 1X Technologies (United States). Expedition A3 is taller at 175 cm, against 170 cm for NEO. Expedition A3 is heavier: 55 kg versus 30 kg for NEO. NEO has more degrees of freedom (75 against 49). Both are in pilot deployments. Listed prices: $45,000 for Expedition A3 and $20,000 for NEO.
Add up to two more robots or show only the rows that differ.
| Spec |   🇨🇳 ChinaPilot |   🇺🇸 United StatesPilot |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Year | ||
| Year | 2026 | 2024 |
| Body | ||
| Height | ||
| Height | 175 cm | 170 cm |
| Weight | ||
| Weight | 55 kg | 30 kg |
| Degrees of freedom | ||
| Degrees of freedom | 49 | 75 |
| DoF (hands) | ||
| DoF (hands) | 125 | 22 |
| Fingers | ||
| Fingers | 5 | 10 |
| Structural material | ||
| Structural material | Aerospace-grade Aluminum / Carbon Fiber | Soft 3D-lattice polymer body; machine-washable nylon suit/shoes. |
| Color | ||
| Color | Silver / Black / White | - |
| Size | ||
| Size | - | Height 5’6”; Weight 66 lbs |
| Motion | ||
| Max speed | ||
| Max speed | 7 km/h | 22 km/h |
| Walking speed | ||
| Walking speed | 7 km/h | 5 km/h |
| Strength | ||
| Strength | 10 kg | 70 kg |
| Runtime | ||
| Runtime | 8 h | 4 h |
| Motor tech | ||
| Motor tech | PowerFlow Integrated Joint (Quasi-direct drive) | Tendon-driven actuators; high torque-density motors |
| Gear tech | ||
| Gear tech | Planetary Reducers (< 10 ratio) | Tendon-based transmissions |
| Sensing & Compute | ||
| CPU / GPU | ||
| CPU / GPU | 200 TOPS AI Computing Power | 1X NEO Cortex (NVIDIA Jetson Thor) |
| Operating system | ||
| Operating system | AimRT Framework / Linux-based | - |
| LLM integration | ||
| LLM integration | WorkGPT (Multimodal Large Model) | Built-in LLM + Redwood AI vision-language model for learning & chores. |
| Camera | ||
| Camera | RGB-D Cameras + Fisheye Cameras | Dual 8.85 MP stereo fisheye at 90 Hz |
| Connectivity | ||
| Connectivity | 5G, Ethernet, Wi‑Fi | Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, 5G |
| Latency (glass → action) | ||
| Latency (glass → action) | Low-latency | teleop via app/VR is supported |
| Safety & Market | ||
| Safe with humans | ||
| Safe with humans | Yes | Yes |
| Ingress protection | ||
| Ingress protection | - | Hands IP68 (submersible); Body IP44 (splash-proof). |
| Primary market | ||
| Primary market | Commercial Service, Entertainment, retail | Consumer home use |
| Country | ||
| Country | China | United States |
| Availability | ||
| Availability | Pilot | Pilot |
| Price | ||
| Price | $ 45 000 | $ 20 000 |
| Verified facts | ||
| Deployments | ||
| Deployments | 1 | - |
| Production records | ||
| Production records | - | 1 |
| All reviewed facts | ||
| All reviewed facts | 2 | 19 |
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 H1AGIBOT · Unitree Robotics- NEO vs Optimus1X Technologies · Tesla
Figure vs NEOFigure AI · 1X Technologies- H1 vs NEOUnitree Robotics · 1X Technologies