Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Lemberg Solutions (4.8/5) edges ahead of Conclusive Engineering (4.5/5) overall. Lemberg Solutions is the better choice for RTOS and secure-firmware projects needing chip-vendor partnerships. Conclusive Engineering is the stronger option for automotive and healthcare firmware needing ISO 26262 or IEC 61508 alignment. 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 | 4.5 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Direct NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip partner status combined with an in-house hardware lab for board bring-up | Nordic Semiconductor and Texas Instruments partner status paired with FreeBSD depth most embedded firms don't carry |
| Pricing model | Firmware consulting, design-phase engagement, full development lifecycle, or staff augmentation | Project-based engineering engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | MISRA C, FreeRTOS, Zephyr | MISRA C, FreeRTOS, Embedded Linux |
| Industries served | Healthcare (FDA, HIPAA, IEC 62304, ISO 13485), Energy (battery management, EV charging, OCPP), Transportation & Logistics (ISO 26262, IEC 61508), Manufacturing & Industrial IoT (IEC 62443), Consumer Electronics (FCC, CE/RED), Automotive (ISO 26262, ASPICE, ISO/SAE 21434) | Automotive, Healthcare, Industrial, Manufacturing |
Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering: overview
Lemberg Solutions
Lemberg Solutions was founded in Lviv in 2007 and has grown to a 200+ person team with additional offices in Hamburg, London, and Kraków. Its firmware practice covers RTOS and bare-metal architecture on FreeRTOS, Zephyr, and Azure RTOS, secure boot and OTA update design, MCU and platform migration, and embedded GUI work in Qt, LVGL, and TouchGFX, backed by direct partnership status with NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip. An in-house lab with oscilloscopes, evaluation kits, and hardware-in-the-loop testing lets the team validate board bring-up rather than outsource it. ISO 9001, ISO 27001, and ISO 13485 certifications, plus MISRA-aware testing, support regulated healthcare, automotive, and industrial clients, and the company transfers full IP and source code rights to the client on delivery.
Conclusive Engineering
Conclusive Engineering was founded in 2018 by Jakub Klama and Wojciech Kloska in Katowice, Poland, and has grown to a team most sources place between 30 and 50 engineers. The company works across the embedded stack, from bootloader and RTOS architecture through embedded Linux and FreeBSD systems, with named clients in automotive and healthcare where ISO 26262 and IEC 61508 alignment matters. It is also a listed Nordic Semiconductor and Texas Instruments partner, giving it direct access to chip-level support on those platforms rather than working purely from public datasheets.
Services and capabilities: Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering
| Capability | Lemberg Solutions | Conclusive Engineering |
|---|---|---|
| RTOS firmware development | ✓ | ✓ |
| Bare-metal & driver development | ✓ | ✓ |
| Secure boot / OTA firmware updates | ✓ | ✗ |
| MCU & platform migration | ✓ | ✗ |
| Connectivity & IoT protocols | ✓ | ✗ |
| Functional safety / compliance | ✓ | ✓ |
| Embedded AI / on-device inference | ✓ | ✗ |
| Firmware GUI development | ✓ | ✗ |
| Hardware co-design / board bring-up | ✓ | ✗ |
| Staff augmentation | ✓ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering
| Framework / platform | Lemberg Solutions | Conclusive Engineering |
|---|---|---|
| FreeRTOS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Zephyr | ✓ | N/A |
| STM32 | ✓ | N/A |
| ARM Cortex-M | ✓ | ✓ |
| Embedded Linux | ✓ | ✓ |
| BLE | N/A | N/A |
| MISRA | ✓ | ✓ |
| Secure Boot | N/A | N/A |
| AWS IoT | ✓ | N/A |
| RISC-V | ✓ | 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 | Project-based engineering, Design-phase consulting |
| 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 (battery management, EV charging, OCPP), Transportation & Logistics (ISO 26262, IEC 61508) | Automotive, Healthcare, Industrial |
| Best use cases | OCPP-compliant control firmware for an EV charging station rollout, Firmware code audit of a fielded product ahead of a security certification | Bootloader and RTOS architecture for a new automotive control module, FreeBSD-based embedded Linux system for an industrial gateway |
| Typical project type | Firmware consulting | Project-based engineering |
Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering: pros and cons
| Lemberg Solutions | |
|---|---|
| + | Direct partner status with NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip gives chip-level support most firmware vendors have to route through a distributor |
| + | In-house lab with oscilloscopes, evaluation kits, and HIL testing covers board bring-up work that many pure-software firms outsource |
| + | ISO 27001, ISO 9001, and ISO 13485 certifications plus MISRA-aware testing fit regulated medical and industrial clients |
| + | Embedded GUI capability across Qt, LVGL, and TouchGFX is broader than most competitors that only support one framework |
| + | Full IP and source code rights transfer to the client on every engagement |
| - | Does not run mass production in-house, so device manufacturing still requires a separate partner |
| - | Does not handle regulatory certification submissions on the client's behalf, only the supporting technical documentation |
| - | No published minimum engagement figure, so smaller teams need a scoping call before knowing if budget fits |
| Conclusive Engineering | |
|---|---|
| + | Nordic Semiconductor and Texas Instruments partner listings give direct chip-vendor support channels rather than public-datasheet-only development |
| + | FreeBSD expertise is uncommon among firmware vendors, most of whom default to Linux or bare-metal only |
| + | ISO 26262 and IEC 61508 alignment work suits safety-relevant automotive and industrial clients |
| + | Founder-led team formed specifically around embedded systems rather than growing out of a general software house |
| - | Team size estimates vary by source between roughly 30 and 50 people, capping concurrent large-program capacity |
| - | Founded in 2018, so its public track record is shorter than firms with 15 to 25 years of delivery history |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement threshold |
Who should choose Lemberg Solutions?
A typical fit: OCPP-compliant control firmware for an EV charging station rollout.
Direct NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip partner status combined with an in-house hardware lab for board bring-up. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Healthcare (FDA, HIPAA, IEC 62304, ISO 13485), Energy (battery management, EV charging, OCPP), Transportation & Logistics (ISO 26262, IEC 61508), Manufacturing & Industrial IoT (IEC 62443), Consumer Electronics (FCC, CE/RED), Automotive (ISO 26262, ASPICE, ISO/SAE 21434).
Who should choose Conclusive Engineering?
A typical fit: bootloader and RTOS architecture for a new automotive control module.
Nordic Semiconductor and Texas Instruments partner status paired with FreeBSD depth most embedded firms don't carry. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| OCPP-compliant control firmware for an EV charging station rollout | Strong | Limited | Lemberg Solutions |
| Firmware code audit of a fielded product ahead of a security certification | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Bootloader and RTOS architecture for a new automotive control module | Limited | Strong | Conclusive Engineering |
| FreeBSD-based embedded Linux system for an industrial gateway | Limited | Strong | Conclusive Engineering |
| 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 Development projects. Direct NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip partner status combined with an in-house hardware lab for board bring-up.
Conclusive Engineering (4.5/5) is worth a look if you need FreeBSD-based embedded Linux system for an industrial gateway. 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 gives chip-level support most firmware vendors have to route through a distributor. Conclusive Engineering's strongest advantage: nordic Semiconductor and Texas Instruments partner listings give direct chip-vendor support channels rather than public-datasheet-only development.
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 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 company 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 combined with an in-house hardware lab for board bring-up. Conclusive Engineering's primary differentiator is: nordic Semiconductor and Texas Instruments partner status paired with FreeBSD depth most embedded firms don't carry. 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 (battery management, EV charging, OCPP) vs Automotive, Healthcare).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.