Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Lemberg Solutions (4.8/5) edges ahead of Conclusive Engineering (4.3/5) overall. Lemberg Solutions is the better choice for architecture consulting that can transition directly into full development. Conclusive Engineering is the stronger option for design-phase consulting that can convert into in-house hardware and firmware development. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Lemberg Solutions | Conclusive Engineering |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2007 | 2018 |
| HQ | Lviv, Ukraine (offices in Hamburg, Germany; London, UK; Kraków, Poland) | Katowice, Poland |
| Team size | 200+ | 30–50 |
| Rating | 4.8 / 5 | 4.3 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Direct NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip partner status backing platform and RTOS selection advisory before development starts | Nordic Semiconductor and Texas Instruments partner status backing a distinct design-phase consulting offering |
| Pricing model | Firmware consulting, design-phase engagement, full development lifecycle, or staff augmentation | Design-phase consulting, project-based engineering engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | FreeRTOS, Zephyr, Azure RTOS | FreeRTOS, Embedded Linux, FreeBSD |
| Industries served | Healthcare (FDA, HIPAA, IEC 62304, ISO 13485), Energy, Transportation & Logistics, Manufacturing & Industrial IoT, Consumer Electronics, Automotive | Automotive, Healthcare, Industrial, Manufacturing |
Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering: overview
Lemberg Solutions
Lemberg Solutions was founded in 2007 in Lviv, Ukraine and has grown to a 200+ person team with additional offices in Hamburg, London, and Kraków. Its firmware consulting practice covers platform and MCU selection, RTOS strategy, and architecture-level guidance delivered before a client commits to full development, backed by direct partnership status with NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip and an in-house lab for hardware validation. ISO 9001, ISO 27001, and ISO 13485 certifications give an advisory engagement documented process credibility that a purely informal consulting relationship doesn't carry.
Conclusive Engineering
Conclusive Engineering was founded in 2018 in Katowice, Poland by Jakub Klama and Wojciech Kloska, with a team most sources place between 30 and 50 engineers. Its design-phase consulting service exists as a distinct offering from its full embedded systems build capability, covering microcontroller and FPGA-based architecture decisions before a client commits to hardware and firmware development, with listed partner status at Nordic Semiconductor and Texas Instruments backing chip-selection advisory. Automotive and healthcare clients requiring ISO 26262 and IEC 61508 alignment give the consulting practice regulated-industry credibility beyond a general embedded advisory pitch.
Services and capabilities: Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering
| Capability | Lemberg Solutions | Conclusive Engineering |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture review | ✓ | ✓ |
| Feasibility assessment | ✓ | ✓ |
| Functional safety consulting | ✓ | ✓ |
| Technical training | ✗ | ✗ |
| Expert-witness services | ✗ | ✗ |
| Hardware co-design | ✓ | ✓ |
| Medical device firmware | ✗ | ✗ |
| IoT connectivity | ✗ | ✗ |
| Staff augmentation | ✓ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering
| Framework / platform | Lemberg Solutions | Conclusive Engineering |
|---|---|---|
| C | ✓ | ✓ |
| C++ | ✓ | ✓ |
| RTOS | ✓ | ✓ |
| ISO 26262 | N/A | N/A |
| IEC 61508 | N/A | N/A |
| MISRA C | ✓ | N/A |
| FPGA | N/A | ✓ |
| Embedded Linux | ✓ | ✓ |
| PCB Design | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering
| Criterion | Lemberg Solutions | Conclusive Engineering |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Firmware consulting, Design-phase engagement, Full development lifecycle, Staff augmentation | Design-phase consulting, Project-based engineering |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering
| Dimension | Lemberg Solutions | Conclusive Engineering |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Healthcare (FDA, HIPAA, IEC 62304, ISO 13485), Energy, Transportation & Logistics | Automotive, Healthcare, Industrial |
| Best use cases | Architecture and feasibility assessment before committing to a full firmware build, RTOS and MCU selection advisory for a new product line | Design-phase architecture consulting before committing to a full firmware build, ISO 26262 or IEC 61508 alignment review for an automotive or industrial program |
| Typical project type | Firmware consulting | Design-phase consulting |
Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering: pros and cons
| Lemberg Solutions | |
|---|---|
| + | Direct partner status with NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip means MCU selection advice comes with chip-vendor-level engineering support behind it |
| + | Design-phase engagement is offered as its own line item, not only as a prelude to a locked-in full build |
| + | In-house hardware lab lets architecture recommendations be validated against real silicon before a client commits budget |
| + | ISO 9001, ISO 27001, and ISO 13485 certifications give an advisory engagement a documented process a client can audit |
| + | Full IP and source code rights transfer to the client on delivery |
| - | Does not run mass production in-house, so a consulting engagement that leads to production still needs a separate manufacturing partner |
| - | Does not submit regulatory certification filings on the client's behalf, only supporting technical documentation |
| - | No published consulting day rate or minimum engagement figure |
| Conclusive Engineering | |
|---|---|
| + | Design-phase consulting is offered as a distinct engagement, not only as a sales funnel into a locked-in build contract |
| + | Nordic Semiconductor and Texas Instruments partner status gives chip-selection advisory direct vendor-level backing |
| + | ISO 26262 and IEC 61508 alignment experience suits regulated-industry architecture consulting specifically |
| + | In-house PCB and hardware design capability means an architecture recommendation can be validated by the same team that made it |
| - | Team size estimates vary between roughly 30 and 50 engineers depending on source |
| - | 7 years of operating history is shorter than several other consulting-focused firms on this list |
| - | No published consulting rate or minimum engagement threshold |
Who should choose Lemberg Solutions?
A typical fit: architecture and feasibility assessment before committing to a full firmware build.
Direct NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip partner status backing platform and RTOS selection advisory before development starts. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Healthcare (FDA, HIPAA, IEC 62304, ISO 13485), Energy, Transportation & Logistics, Manufacturing & Industrial IoT, Consumer Electronics, Automotive.
Who should choose Conclusive Engineering?
A typical fit: design-phase architecture consulting before committing to a full firmware build.
Nordic Semiconductor and Texas Instruments partner status backing a distinct design-phase consulting offering. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Automotive, Healthcare, Industrial, Manufacturing.
Decision matrix: Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Both offer fixed-price models |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Lemberg Solutions (Not published) vs Conclusive Engineering (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Lemberg Solutions |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Lemberg Solutions |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Lemberg Solutions |
Use case fit: Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering
| Use case | Lemberg Solutions fit | Conclusive Engineering fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture and feasibility assessment before committing to a full firmware build | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| RTOS and MCU selection advisory for a new product line | Strong | Limited | Lemberg Solutions |
| Design-phase architecture consulting before committing to a full firmware build | Limited | Strong | Conclusive Engineering |
| ISO 26262 or IEC 61508 alignment review for an automotive or industrial program | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering
Lemberg Solutions (4.8/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Firmware Consulting projects. Direct NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip partner status backing platform and RTOS selection advisory before development starts.
Conclusive Engineering (4.3/5) is worth a look if you need ISO 26262 or IEC 61508 alignment review for an automotive or industrial program. If your situation matches that, Conclusive Engineering is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering FAQ
Is Lemberg Solutions better than Conclusive Engineering?
Lemberg Solutions (4.8/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Lemberg Solutions's strongest advantage: direct partner status with NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip means MCU selection advice comes with chip-vendor-level engineering support behind it. Conclusive Engineering's strongest advantage: design-phase consulting is offered as a distinct engagement, not only as a sales funnel into a locked-in build contract.
How do Lemberg Solutions and Conclusive Engineering differ in pricing?
Lemberg Solutions uses firmware consulting, design-phase engagement, full development lifecycle, or staff augmentation pricing. Conclusive Engineering uses design-phase consulting, project-based engineering engagements pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Lemberg Solutions or Conclusive Engineering?
Conclusive Engineering is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each consultancy before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between Lemberg Solutions and Conclusive Engineering?
Lemberg Solutions's primary differentiator is: direct NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip partner status backing platform and RTOS selection advisory before development starts. Conclusive Engineering's primary differentiator is: nordic Semiconductor and Texas Instruments partner status backing a distinct design-phase consulting offering. They also differ in team size (200+ vs 30–50), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Healthcare (FDA, HIPAA, IEC 62304, ISO 13485), Energy vs Automotive, Healthcare).
Verify all details directly with each consultancy before making a decision.