The Franka Emika Panda was sleek, smart, and beloved by universities — until Franka Emika hit financial turbulence in 2023.

Meanwhile, RO1 by Standard Bots quietly showed up ready to work, run 24/7, and not freak out when someone drops a wrench nearby.

One got famous in research labs. The other was designed to survive a CNC shift without crying. If you're weighing the Panda arm against RO1 in 2025, get ready, because we’re going for a deep dive. 

In this article, we’ll cover:

• Franka Emika Panda vs. RO1
• A feature-by-feature showdown 
• Which cobot should you choose?

‍

Franka Emika Panda vs. RO1: A quick comparison

If you just want the short version: Panda was made for precision in clean labs, RO1 is ready to grind next to a CNC. 

The Franka Emika Panda (now Franka Research 3) made its name on smooth movements and easy programmability, and the Panda arm still holds its own in research-heavy environments. But RO1 delivers heavier payloads, stronger durability, and a support team that wasn’t disrupted by insolvency filings.

Here’s how the two stack up at a glance:

‍

Franka Emika Panda vs. RO1: Background

The Franka Emika Panda — now known as the Franka Research 3 — earned a rep as the IT lab cobot. It’s lightweight, ultra-precise, and incredibly nimble thanks to its 7-axis design. According to Franka Robotics, several prestigious research institutions worldwide were using the platform by 2022, including MIT and the Oxford Robotics Institute.

But in 2023, things got messy. Franka Emika filed for insolvency, and while the hardware is still shipping through distributors, things continue to be a bit murky.

RO1 took a different route entirely — straight into production mode. Standard Bots designed it to handle the gritty stuff: CNC tending, sanding, gluing, inspection, and more. It’s a 6-axis cobot with an 18 kg payload and a no-code interface that skips the all of the typical installation trouble.

For a closer look at what RO1 tackles on the floor, our breakdown has receipts.

‍

Panda vs. RO1: Feature-by-feature comparison

Both cobots have the stats to impress on paper — but they were designed for totally different ecosystems. Franka Research 3 is precise, soft-touch, and super flexible in small spaces. RO1’s more about repeatability, muscle, and running full shifts without complaint.

Here’s how the Panda and RO1 stack up where it counts:

‍

7-DOF vs. 6-axis arms

The Franka Research 3 has an extra joint — that’s the big pitch. It uses seven degrees of freedom to mimic a human arm, so it can work at weird angles, adjust on the fly, and handle tight bench setups like a champ.

RO1 sticks with a standard 6-axis layout — the layout most industrial arms use — because it doesn’t need yoga tricks to get things done. It’s built for straight-line jobs like CNC tending, sanding, welding, and gluing. You know, factory stuff.

How they move (and why it matters):

• Franka Research 3 is extra bendy: With seven degrees of freedom, the Franka Emika Panda can snake into tight setups, change approach angles easily, and mimic human reach like a pro yogi. This is great for fine assembly, small-batch prototyping, or labs where space is insufficient. Want to run experiments in force control, teach trajectory planning, or flex on your research group with custom motion scripts? This is your bot.
  
  
• RO1 keeps it classic (and stronger): RO1 sticks to the standard industrial 6-axis architecture, which makes programming simpler and payload performance more consistent under stress. Its layout is optimized for CNC, sanding, and welding arms that don’t need to do acrobatics, just deliver.
  
  
• Flexibility tradeoff: Franka’s arm can technically reach around trickier geometry, but with only 3 kg of payload, it’s not winning any arm-wrestling competitions anytime soon. 

Key takeaway: Need a cobot that can sneak around inside a tight lab bench setup? Go Franka. Need one that can lift something heavier than a coffee mug? RO1 all day.

‍

Payload and power

3 kg vs. 18 kg isn’t a fair fight, and it’s not supposed to be. The Franka Research 3 was made for delicate sensors and micro-parts. RO1 was made to move actual hardware like it’s arm day at the gym. 

Here’s how much each robot can carry without falling apart:

• Franka Research 3: 3 kg max payload. That’s enough for sensors, grippers, maybe some tweezers. Ideal for labs and prototypes — not for hauling actual parts across a line. Fit for conference booths, STEM outreach, or YouTube explainers — the Panda moves smooth and doesn’t overheat under stage lights.
  
  
• RO1: 18 kg payload. That’s trays, tools, assemblies, or anything else that’s heavier than a latte. Designed for CNC cells, sanding arms, automated gluing, and lifting parts that don’t come in ESD bags.
  
  
• Why it matters: You’re lifting tools, fixtures, and whatever your process needs attached to the arm. RO1 handles that. Panda doesn’t even try.
  

Key takeaway: If it weighs less than a newborn baby, Franka’s fine. If it weighs more than your gaming laptop, go RO1.

‍

Repeatability

This one’s about precision — not lab-precision, but “does this screw line up 1,000 times in a row” precision. Here’s how both bots compare when you need the same move to land pixel-perfect every cycle:

• Franka Research 3: ±0.1 mm — totally solid for research, prototyping, and precision pick-and-place stuff. Great in environments where consistency matters, but force doesn’t.
  
  
• RO1: ±0.025 mm — tight enough for sanding, welding, and other jobs where being off by half a millimeter means rework. That’s lab-grade precision with production-grade durability.
  
  
• The gap that matters: Franka wins for repeatability relative to size and load. RO1 wins for repeatability when it’s under pressure, with heavier tools, and at scale.

Key takeaway: Franka can hit the same spot — RO1 can hit the same spot while holding 6x the weight.

‍

Ease of use and operator experience

Both cobots claim to be “easy to use,” but what that means depends on whether your team codes for fun or needs to get back to production.

What it’s like to actually use these:

• Franka Research 3: Friendly if you’re technical. It offers low-code tools and ROS integration that make sense in lab environments, but still leans dev-heavy for anything beyond basic motion. It’s easy to mount, safe to use around coffee, and way less intimidating than the $100K monsters in the next lab over.
  
  
• RO1: The touchscreen, teach-by-demonstration mode is built for humans, not sysadmins. No code required, so you don’t need a dev team. You need someone to touch the screen. Set points, drag paths, go. Perfect for operators who want zero install chaos and zero terminal windows.
  
  
• Learning curve reality check: Franka expects you to bring some knowledge. RO1 expects you to have fingers. (Nose works too!) 

Key takeaway: If your team has an engineer on hand, the Panda works. If your team includes Dave from machine ops, RO1 saves you from tech support hell.

‍

Pricing

One is wrapped in academic dealer pricing. The other shows its rates on the homepage.

Here’s how each handles cost transparency and access:

• Franka Research 3: The Franka Emika Panda price depends on your location, distributor, academic affiliation, and whether you know the rep personally. Some buyers report low five figures, others get education-only bundles. Expect to pay around $30K, as is the case here. For 3 kg, that’s expensive AF.
  
  
• RO1: Starts at $5/hour to lease, or buy outright with transparent rates. You get trial, setup, and support — no “premium module” upsells required just to make it move. If you want to buy, it’s half the price of comparable models. (Like models by Universal Robots or FANUC.)
  
  
• Reality check: If you’re in academia or already tied to a Panda dealer, you’ll likely get a deal. If you want consistent pricing and fewer quote emails, RO1 is the move.

‍

Ideal users: Who is it best for?

These two cobots were never aiming for the same audience, which is why comparing them is less “which is better” and more “what are you even trying to do?”

Franka Research 3 (aka Panda arm):

• Researchers testing novel control algorithms
• Educators demoing robotics to undergrads
• Developers working on light-load proof-of-concepts
• Labs where everything is clean, controlled, and small-scale

RO1:

• Factory teams doing CNC, sanding, gluing, and tending
• Integrators who don’t want to train every new hire for six months
• Anyone who needs more than 3 kg of lift and doesn’t want to write code
• Ops leads who’ve asked, “Can this just run without crashing every day?”

‍

Which cobot should you choose?

This isn’t Coke vs. Pepsi — it’s research tool vs. factory tank. Franka Research 3 is what you pick when your team is running Python and publishing papers. RO1 is what you pick when your team is running shifts and getting paid to move parts, not write firmware.

Let’s run the matchups the way they deserve — side by side, with no mercy:

‍

Choose RO1 when you need …

A cobot that can carry, repeat, and not crash when someone looks at it funny.

This thing isn’t trying to win robotics design awards — it’s trying to lift trays, run parts, and not make your shift supervisor cry. It’s the “can we do this without calling IT?” bot. You want to automate something, but you also want it running by Friday. RO1 gets it.

Remember, it’s got: 

• 18 kg of “let me just grab that”
• ±0.025 mm repeatability that slaps
• Zero-code install 
• Quick-swap EOAT, fast setup, with no software rewrites

‍

Choose Franka Emika Panda when you need …

A cobot that can sneak into a lab demo and not scare your thesis advisor.

The panda arm may not bench 18 kg, but it can finesse a wire, flex like a grad student, and quietly run ROS nodes while you stress-eat granola bars.

It’s got: 

• Human-arm mimicry with 7 axes for weird geometry
• A dev-friendly playground
• Frictionless in education setups
• A lightweight demo king
• Low-load energy

‍

Summing up

This isn’t a spec sheet battle — it’s about what you need your cobot to survive. The Franka Emika Panda (now Franka Research 3) still crushes it in labs, classrooms, and R&D. It’s precise, nimble, and makes sense when your robot is part of the experiment.

RO1? The undisputed shop floor short king. It can take more weight, handle real tools, and doesn’t flinch when you throw it into production on day one.

So yeah, Franka Emika Panda vs. RO1 is a use case separation deal. If your work smells like solder and spreadsheets, go Panda. If it smells like metal dust and throughput goals, it’s RO1 time.

‍

Next steps with Standard Bots

RO1 by Standard Bots is the six-axis cobot upgrade your factory needs to automate smarter.

• Affordable and adaptable: Best-in-class automation at half the price of competitors; leasing starts at just $5/hour.
  
  
• Precision and strength: Repeatability of ±0.025 mm and an 18 kg payload make it ideal for CNC, assembly, and material handling, and a lot more.
  
  
• AI-driven and user-friendly: No-code framework means anyone can program RO1 — no engineers, no complicated setups. And its AI on par with GPT-4 means it keeps learning on the job.
  
  
• Safety-minded design: Machine vision and collision detection let RO1 work side by side with human operators.

Book your risk-free, 30-day onsite trial today and see how RO1 can take your factory automation to the next level.