Comparison
Performance Turf Tee Box (4×6) vs SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)
When you buy through links on Northcourse, we may earn a commission at no additional cost to you. Read the full affiliate disclosure
A side-by-side look at how the Fiberbuilt Performance Turf Tee Box (4×6) and Shop Indoor Golf SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5) compare on specs, accuracy, room requirements, and price. No hype — just the parts of the decision a buyer actually weighs.
Also worth a look
More comparisons with the Performance Turf Tee Box (4×6) and SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)
SIG Fairway Series Golf Mat (5×5) vs SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)$550 · $530
HotShot Hitting Mat (4×5) vs SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)$500 · $530
SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5) vs SwingTurf Golf Hitting Mat (5×5)$530 · $499
Performance Turf Tee Box (4×6) vs SIGPRO Softy Lite (4x5)$699 · $740
Pure Flight MAX Hitting Mat (5×5) vs SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)$580 · $530
Country Club Elite Mat (4×5) vs SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)$479 · $530
Buy Performance Turf Tee Box (4×6)
Show all 2 retailersShow fewer retailers
Prices confirmed Nov 10, 2026 · we check every retailer daily
Buy SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)
- Buy at Amazon $397Free ship, SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)
- Buy at Indoor Golf Outlet $397Free ship, SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)
Prices confirmed Nov 10, 2026 · we check every retailer daily
When you buy through links on Northcourse, we may earn a commission at no additional cost to you. Read the full affiliate disclosure
Full specificationsEvery spec for both, line by line
Specifications
The numbers, lined up.
Dimensions
| Spec | Performance Turf Tee Box (4×6) | SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5) |
|---|---|---|
| Hitting Surface | 6' × 4' (Fiberbuilt: 73" wide × 49" deep), turf over the whole mat | 5' × 5' (60" × 60") |
| Thickness | 2" (Fiberbuilt) | 1.6" |
- Hitting SurfacePerformance Turf Tee Box (4×6)6' × 4' (Fiberbuilt: 73" wide × 49" deep), turf over the whole matSIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)5' × 5' (60" × 60")
- ThicknessPerformance Turf Tee Box (4×6)2" (Fiberbuilt)SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)1.6"
Practical
| Spec | Performance Turf Tee Box (4×6) | SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5) |
|---|---|---|
| Weight | About 106 lb | — |
| Real Tee | Yes, a standard tee anywhere on the mat | No — four slots for adjustable simulator tees (Tomahawk NEO, BirTee, TeeClaw) |
| Use | — | Indoor or outdoor |
- WeightPerformance Turf Tee Box (4×6)About 106 lbSIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)—
- Real TeePerformance Turf Tee Box (4×6)Yes, a standard tee anywhere on the matSIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)No — four slots for adjustable simulator tees (Tomahawk NEO, BirTee, TeeClaw)
- UsePerformance Turf Tee Box (4×6)—SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)Indoor or outdoor
Hardware
| Spec | Performance Turf Tee Box (4×6) | SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5) |
|---|---|---|
| Turf | Fiberbuilt Performance Turf, all nylon, UV resistant; no separate hitting strip | Woven turf over a layer of elastic fibers |
| Base | Modular rubber foundation, tool-free assembly | — |
- TurfPerformance Turf Tee Box (4×6)Fiberbuilt Performance Turf, all nylon, UV resistant; no separate hitting stripSIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)Woven turf over a layer of elastic fibers
- BasePerformance Turf Tee Box (4×6)Modular rubber foundation, tool-free assemblySIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)—
Pricing
| Spec | Performance Turf Tee Box (4×6) | SIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5) |
|---|---|---|
| Other Sizes | 4' × 4' $479, 4' × 8' $965, 6' × 6' $1,079, 4' × 10' $1,195 at PlayBetter | — |
- Other SizesPerformance Turf Tee Box (4×6)4' × 4' $479, 4' × 8' $965, 6' × 6' $1,079, 4' × 10' $1,195 at PlayBetterSIGPRO 3D Golf Mat (5×5)—
Persona fitWho each one is better for
Who each one is better for
Both fit the same buyers.
Neither one wins a persona the other doesn’t. The choice comes down to specs, price, and room fit rather than buyer profile.
Both fit
- Recreational Player
Build your simulator in two minutes
Five questions. One tailored build with retailer links.
We ask about your budget, your room, and how you’ll use it. We return a complete build — launch monitor, mat, enclosure, projector, software, PC — with the reasoning behind every pick and the alternatives we considered.