Microduck vs Reachy Mini

Start with locomotion or interaction

Pollen Robotics makes both robots, but they are designed around different questions. Its Microduck introduction describes a biped built to move through the world. It contrasts that goal with Reachy Mini’s emphasis on seeing, listening, speaking, and expressive interaction.

Choose Microduck if the central question is how a small robot balances, walks, recovers, or learns a physical behavior. Choose Reachy Mini if the central question is how an application communicates through gaze, head movement, audio, and a desktop presence. Neither project is automatically better for every learner.

Compare the hardware that your idea actually needs

For Microduck’s published hardware, see our specifications guide. Its motion-oriented package includes 15 motors, a front camera, an 8 × 8 depth sensor, and two IMUs. A camera and microphones alone do not establish a ready-made conversational assistant; we do not assume that capability for Microduck.

The official Reachy Mini Wireless datasheet specifies a 12 MP, 120-degree autofocus camera, a microphone array, a speaker, and an onboard Raspberry Pi Compute Module 4. The Lite datasheet describes the external-computer USB-C interface and the same categories of expressive motion.

Write a short requirement list before comparing numbers. A classroom exercise about walking policies and a desk application that reacts to spoken input need different hardware and evaluation methods. More motors or more camera pixels do not answer the same question.

Programming workflows differ

Microduck’s runtime and RL environments separate running the robot from training movement policies. You can begin with a simulator and existing behavior before changing the learning setup. Our Microduck programming guide walks through those starting points.

The Reachy Mini documentation provides Python and JavaScript development routes, simulation, and an application ecosystem. Its integration guide also documents browser apps and HTTP/WebSocket control. This suits projects in which application logic drives expressive responses.

For either robot, make the first milestone small enough to evaluate: one event, one behavior, one expected result. Investigate any model hosting, network, or service requirements before depending on an AI integration for a live demonstration.

Price and version differences

On 27 October 2026, Pollen Robotics’ Reachy Mini page advertises Lite at $399 and Wireless at $499. It describes both as DIY kits, with roughly two hours of assembly. Wireless includes onboard compute; Lite relies on your computer. Those are manufacturer figures and should be rechecked before purchase.

For Microduck, the manufacturer advertises an introductory $399 before taxes and shipping. Our announced price on Buy Microduck is 400 USD, with status Coming soon. We do not accept orders or payments, and we have not announced our shipping or tax terms. Read the Microduck price guide before comparing offers.

Budget for the full project: computer access, relevant accessories, delivery charges, and any services your application uses. A similar advertised robot price can lead to a different total cost once the development setup is included.

Which would we choose for a first project?

• Movement and reinforcement learning: begin by exploring Microduck’s simulator and published policies.
• Expressive desktop applications: inspect Reachy Mini’s SDK and existing application examples.
• Working with an existing computer: evaluate the Lite workflow against the host you intend to use.
• Learning before buying: try the relevant simulator and read one complete example from setup to expected behavior.

What this comparison is based on

This is an editorial comparison of manufacturer documentation reviewed on 27 October 2026. It is not a hands-on benchmark or a claim that we tested either robot’s performance. Confirm the exact version, current software, and purchase terms against your own project requirements.