Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Lemberg Solutions (4.9/5) edges ahead of Conclusive Engineering (4.7/5) overall. Lemberg Solutions is the better choice for RTOS firmware needing secure boot and direct chip-vendor partnerships. Conclusive Engineering is the stronger option for hard real-time Linux and FreeBSD firmware from a senior team. 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 (second office in Piaseczno) |
| Team size | 200+ | 30+ |
| Rating | 4.9 / 5 | 4.7 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Direct NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip partnerships paired with an in-house hardware lab for board bring-up and HIL testing | Founder-led team specializing in low-level debugging and hard real-time optimization rather than general embedded staffing |
| Pricing model | Firmware consulting, design-phase engagement, full development lifecycle, or team extension/staff augmentation | Full-service embedded hardware, software, and firmware engagement |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Primary tech stack | FreeRTOS, Zephyr, Azure RTOS | Linux, FreeBSD, RTOS |
| Industries served | Healthcare (FDA/HIPAA/IEC 62304), Energy (battery management, EV charging), Transportation & Logistics, Manufacturing & Industrial IoT, Consumer Electronics, Automotive | Industrial automation, Telecommunications, Automotive |
Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering: overview
Lemberg Solutions
Lemberg Solutions is an engineering firm founded in 2007 and headquartered in Lviv, Ukraine, with additional offices in Hamburg, Germany, London, United Kingdom, and Kraków, Poland. The 200+ person team builds RTOS and bare-metal firmware on FreeRTOS, Zephyr, and Azure RTOS, alongside secure boot, OTA update pipelines, and MISRA-aware testing for regulated clients. It holds direct partnerships with NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip as primary semiconductor partners, plus an in-house lab with oscilloscopes and hardware-in-the-loop testing for board bring-up. Public case studies include a KONVOI truck security firmware audit and a Caltech medical device port to STM32, and the company holds ISO 9001, ISO 27001, and ISO 13485 certifications with full IP transfer to the client on delivery.
Conclusive Engineering
Conclusive Engineering was founded in 2018 by Jakub Klama and Wojciech Kloska, based in Katowice, Poland, with a second office in Piaseczno near Warsaw. The team of roughly 30 engineers works across Linux, FreeBSD, RTOS, and bare-metal firmware, with particular depth in low-level debugging and hard real-time optimization for systems that cannot tolerate jitter. Because the founders came directly from kernel and driver-level engineering roles rather than management backgrounds, the firm stays hands-on with senior staff through the full engagement instead of handing projects to junior teams after scoping.
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 / MISRA compliance | ✓ | ✗ |
| Embedded AI / on-device inference | ✓ | ✗ |
| Firmware GUI development | ✓ | ✗ |
| Staff augmentation | ✓ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering
| Framework / platform | Lemberg Solutions | Conclusive Engineering |
|---|---|---|
| FreeRTOS | ✓ | N/A |
| Zephyr | ✓ | N/A |
| STM32 | ✓ | N/A |
| ARM Cortex-M | ✓ | N/A |
| BLE | N/A | N/A |
| Embedded Linux | ✓ | N/A |
| Secure OTA | N/A | N/A |
| PCB | 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 (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Engagement models | Firmware consulting, Design-phase engagement, Full development lifecycle, Staff augmentation | Full-service product development, Firmware consulting |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Minimum disclosed |
| 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), Energy (battery management, EV charging), Transportation & Logistics | Industrial automation, Telecommunications, Automotive |
| Best use cases | Security audit of an existing firmware codebase ahead of a compliance deadline, Secure OTA update pipeline for a fleet of connected industrial devices | Low-level debugging of an intermittent real-time fault in production firmware, FreeBSD-based networking appliance requiring hard real-time guarantees |
| Typical project type | Firmware consulting | Full-service product development |
Lemberg Solutions vs Conclusive Engineering: pros and cons
| Lemberg Solutions | |
|---|---|
| + | Direct partnerships with NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip back up semiconductor-level claims instead of a generic all-chips pitch |
| + | In-house lab with oscilloscopes, evaluation kits, and HIL testing capability covers board bring-up work most pure-firmware vendors outsource |
| + | ISO 27001, ISO 9001, and ISO 13485 certifications plus MISRA-aware testing suit regulated industrial and medical firmware |
| + | Full intellectual property and source code rights transfer to the client on every engagement |
| + | Named case studies span automotive security auditing, medical device porting, and industrial telemetry rather than one vertical |
| - | Does not manufacture finished devices or handle mass production in-house |
| - | Does not obtain product regulatory certification on the client's behalf; the client or a third party owns that process |
| - | Minimum engagement size is not published, so budget fit requires a direct conversation |
| Conclusive Engineering | |
|---|---|
| + | Founders bring direct kernel and driver-level experience rather than a management tier sitting over junior engineers |
| + | Covers Linux, FreeBSD, and bare metal, spanning more of the real-time spectrum than Linux-only vendors |
| + | Small team size keeps senior engineers hands-on for the full engagement instead of handing off after scoping |
| - | Roughly 30 engineers caps how many large programs the firm can staff at once |
| - | Founded in 2018, so its public track record is shorter than firms operating since the 1990s or 2000s |
Who should choose Lemberg Solutions?
A typical fit: security audit of an existing firmware codebase ahead of a compliance deadline.
Direct NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip partnerships paired with an in-house hardware lab for board bring-up and HIL testing. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Healthcare (FDA/HIPAA/IEC 62304), Energy (battery management, EV charging), Transportation & Logistics, Manufacturing & Industrial IoT, Consumer Electronics, Automotive.
Who should choose Conclusive Engineering?
A typical fit: low-level debugging of an intermittent real-time fault in production firmware.
Founder-led team specializing in low-level debugging and hard real-time optimization rather than general embedded staffing. Minimum engagement starts at Not published (per company website; independently unverifiable). Works best with clients in Industrial automation, Telecommunications, Automotive.
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 (per company website; independently unverifiable)) |
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Security audit of an existing firmware codebase ahead of a compliance deadline | Strong | Limited | Lemberg Solutions |
| Secure OTA update pipeline for a fleet of connected industrial devices | Strong | Limited | Lemberg Solutions |
| Low-level debugging of an intermittent real-time fault in production firmware | Limited | Strong | Conclusive Engineering |
| FreeBSD-based networking appliance requiring hard real-time guarantees | 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 (4.9/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Firmware Development projects. Direct NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip partnerships paired with an in-house hardware lab for board bring-up and HIL testing.
Conclusive Engineering (4.7/5) is worth a look if you need FreeBSD-based networking appliance requiring hard real-time guarantees. 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 (4.9/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Lemberg Solutions's strongest advantage: direct partnerships with NXP, STMicroelectronics, and Microchip back up semiconductor-level claims instead of a generic all-chips pitch. Conclusive Engineering's strongest advantage: founders bring direct kernel and driver-level experience rather than a management tier sitting over junior engineers.
How do Lemberg Solutions and Conclusive Engineering differ in pricing?
Lemberg Solutions uses firmware consulting, design-phase engagement, full development lifecycle, or team extension/staff augmentation pricing. Conclusive Engineering uses full-service embedded hardware, software, and firmware engagement pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published (per company website; independently unverifiable). 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?
Lemberg Solutions 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 partnerships paired with an in-house hardware lab for board bring-up and HIL testing. Conclusive Engineering's primary differentiator is: founder-led team specializing in low-level debugging and hard real-time optimization rather than general embedded staffing. They also differ in team size (200+ vs 30+), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published (per company website; independently unverifiable)), and primary industries served (Healthcare (FDA/HIPAA/IEC 62304), Energy (battery management, EV charging) vs Industrial automation, Telecommunications).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.