RMB Consulting vs NOVO Engineering: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
RMB Consulting (4.3/5) edges ahead of NOVO Engineering (4.1/5) overall. RMB Consulting is the better choice for Direct, founder-led firmware architecture consulting on a small engagement. NOVO Engineering is the stronger option for multi-discipline systems architecture advisory spanning mechanical, electrical, and firmware. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
RMB Consulting vs NOVO Engineering: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | RMB Consulting | NOVO Engineering |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1995 | 2004 |
| HQ | Frederick, MD, USA (also Tampa, FL) | Vista, CA, USA |
| Team size | 1–10 | 48–60 |
| Rating | 4.3 / 5 | 4.1 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | 30-plus years of hands-on embedded engineering experience concentrated in a single named principal consultant | Systems-engineering team averaging 16 years of experience per engineer, delivering firmware advisory alongside mechanical and electrical review |
| Pricing model | Project-based and hourly consulting engagements | Fixed-scope product engineering and advisory engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | C, C++, Bare-Metal Firmware | C, C++, Embedded Systems Programming |
| Industries served | Industrial, Consumer electronics, Medical devices | Medical devices, Biotech, Printing technology, Commercial products |
RMB Consulting vs NOVO Engineering: overview
RMB Consulting
RMB Consulting has operated in embedded systems design and consulting since 1995, run by founder and chief engineer Nigel Jones, who brings more than 30 years of professional embedded systems engineering experience. The firm covers hardware, software, and firmware consulting with a team of 1 to 10 people, positioning it at the smallest and most direct end of the advisory spectrum on this list. Nigel Jones is also a recognized voice in the embedded engineering community through long-running technical blogging on firmware design topics, which gives a prospective client a substantial public track record to evaluate before ever making contact.
NOVO Engineering
NOVO Engineering was founded in 2004 and is headquartered in Vista, California near San Diego, with a second location near Minneapolis and a team reported between 48 and 60 engineers averaging 16 years of experience each. Its systems-engineering framing means firmware architecture advisory is delivered alongside mechanical and electrical systems review from the earliest stages of a program, across medical devices, biotech instrumentation, and commercial products. For a buyer whose architecture question spans more than firmware alone, that senior, multi-discipline systems-engineering bench is the specific value.
Services and capabilities: RMB Consulting vs NOVO Engineering
| Capability | RMB Consulting | NOVO 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: RMB Consulting vs NOVO Engineering
| Framework / platform | RMB Consulting | NOVO Engineering |
|---|---|---|
| C | ✓ | ✓ |
| C++ | ✓ | ✓ |
| RTOS | N/A | N/A |
| ISO 26262 | N/A | N/A |
| IEC 61508 | N/A | N/A |
| MISRA C | N/A | N/A |
| FPGA | N/A | N/A |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | N/A |
| PCB Design | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: RMB Consulting vs NOVO Engineering
| Criterion | RMB Consulting | NOVO Engineering |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Project-based consulting, Hourly consulting | Fixed-scope product engineering, Pre-production manufacturing support |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: RMB Consulting vs NOVO Engineering
| Dimension | RMB Consulting | NOVO Engineering |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Industrial, Consumer electronics, Medical devices | Medical devices, Biotech, Printing technology |
| Best use cases | Small firmware architecture review led directly by a senior independent consultant, Bare-metal firmware design consulting for a resource-constrained embedded product | Multi-discipline early architecture review spanning mechanical, electrical, and firmware, Biotech instrumentation feasibility assessment |
| Typical project type | Project-based consulting | Fixed-scope product engineering |
RMB Consulting vs NOVO Engineering: pros and cons
| RMB Consulting | |
|---|---|
| + | 30 years of professional embedded systems experience concentrated in a single named principal, not diluted across a large team |
| + | 30 years of operating history under the same founder gives long continuity of technical judgment |
| + | A substantial public record of technical writing on firmware design topics lets a prospective client evaluate expertise before engaging |
| + | Very small team size means no account-management layer between the client and the engineer doing the work |
| - | A team of 1 to 10 people severely limits capacity for a large or multi-workstream engagement |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement figure |
| - | Availability may be constrained given the founder-led, low-headcount structure |
| NOVO Engineering | |
|---|---|
| + | Engineering team averages 16 years of experience per engineer, a strong signal of senior judgment for an early-stage architecture review |
| + | Systems engineering scope reviews mechanical, electrical, and firmware together, useful when the architecture question spans multiple disciplines |
| + | Two US locations near San Diego and Minneapolis give onsite coverage options for architecture workshops |
| + | 21 years of operating history in medical device and biotech instrumentation advisory work |
| - | 48 to 60 engineers caps how many large concurrent advisory programs the firm can run at once |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement figure |
| - | Firmware advisory is delivered as part of a broader systems-engineering practice, not a standalone firmware-consulting brand |
Who should choose RMB Consulting?
A typical fit: small firmware architecture review led directly by a senior independent consultant.
30-plus years of hands-on embedded engineering experience concentrated in a single named principal consultant. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial, Consumer electronics, Medical devices.
Who should choose NOVO Engineering?
A typical fit: multi-discipline early architecture review spanning mechanical, electrical, and firmware.
Systems-engineering team averaging 16 years of experience per engineer, delivering firmware advisory alongside mechanical and electrical review. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Medical devices, Biotech, Printing technology, Commercial products.
Decision matrix: RMB Consulting vs NOVO Engineering
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | NOVO Engineering |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: RMB Consulting (Not published) vs NOVO Engineering (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | NOVO Engineering |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | RMB Consulting |
Use case fit: RMB Consulting vs NOVO Engineering
| Use case | RMB Consulting fit | NOVO Engineering fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Small firmware architecture review led directly by a senior independent consultant | Strong | Limited | RMB Consulting |
| Bare-metal firmware design consulting for a resource-constrained embedded product | Strong | Limited | RMB Consulting |
| Multi-discipline early architecture review spanning mechanical, electrical, and firmware | Limited | Strong | NOVO Engineering |
| Biotech instrumentation feasibility assessment | Limited | Strong | NOVO Engineering |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: RMB Consulting vs NOVO Engineering
RMB Consulting (4.3/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Firmware Consulting projects. 30-plus years of hands-on embedded engineering experience concentrated in a single named principal consultant.
NOVO Engineering (4.1/5) is worth a look if you need biotech instrumentation feasibility assessment. If your situation matches that, NOVO Engineering is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
RMB Consulting vs NOVO Engineering FAQ
Is RMB Consulting better than NOVO Engineering?
RMB Consulting (4.3/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. RMB Consulting's strongest advantage: 30 years of professional embedded systems experience concentrated in a single named principal, not diluted across a large team. NOVO Engineering's strongest advantage: engineering team averages 16 years of experience per engineer, a strong signal of senior judgment for an early-stage architecture review.
How do RMB Consulting and NOVO Engineering differ in pricing?
RMB Consulting uses project-based and hourly consulting engagements pricing. NOVO Engineering uses fixed-scope product engineering and advisory engagements pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: RMB Consulting or NOVO Engineering?
NOVO 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 RMB Consulting and NOVO Engineering?
RMB Consulting's primary differentiator is: 30-plus years of hands-on embedded engineering experience concentrated in a single named principal consultant. NOVO Engineering's primary differentiator is: systems-engineering team averaging 16 years of experience per engineer, delivering firmware advisory alongside mechanical and electrical review. They also differ in team size (1–10 vs 48–60), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Industrial, Consumer electronics vs Medical devices, Biotech).
Verify all details directly with each consultancy before making a decision.