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 teams wanting to work directly with one named, 30-year-tenured firmware engineer. NOVO Engineering is the stronger option for teams wanting engineers with an unusually high average tenure across disciplines. 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 with a public technical record | Engineering team averaging 16 years of experience per engineer, a specific and checkable seniority claim |
| Pricing model | Project-based and hourly consulting engagements | Fixed-scope product engineering 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 and a long-running record of public technical writing on firmware design. For a client hiring a small team, working directly with a single named, 30-year-tenured engineer, rather than being assigned whichever staff member is available, is close to the smallest and most direct version of an engineering-hire relationship this list offers.
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. That average-tenure figure is a specific, checkable claim a hiring buyer can weigh directly: it means the typical engineer assigned to a project has already spent over a decade and a half solving comparable problems. Systems engineering scope means firmware roles work alongside mechanical and electrical engineers on the same team, not in a separate silo.
Services and capabilities: RMB Consulting vs NOVO Engineering
| Capability | RMB Consulting | NOVO Engineering |
|---|---|---|
| Firmware development | ✓ | ✓ |
| RTOS development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Hardware co-design | ✗ | ✓ |
| Embedded GUI development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Medical device firmware | ✗ | ✓ |
| Functional safety | ✗ | ✗ |
| Technical training | ✗ | ✗ |
| Expert-witness services | ✗ | ✗ |
| Staff augmentation | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: RMB Consulting vs NOVO Engineering
| Framework / platform | RMB Consulting | NOVO Engineering |
|---|---|---|
| C | ✓ | ✓ |
| C++ | ✓ | ✓ |
| FreeRTOS | N/A | N/A |
| Zephyr | N/A | N/A |
| FPGA | N/A | N/A |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | N/A |
| LVGL | N/A | N/A |
| AWS IoT | N/A | N/A |
| ARM Cortex-M | 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 | Hiring a single, deeply experienced engineer for a bare-metal firmware project, Second-opinion technical review from someone with a long public track record | Hiring a multi-discipline team spanning mechanical, electrical, and firmware, Biotech instrumentation development needing senior, cross-discipline engineers |
| 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 engineering experience concentrated in one named, publicly verifiable principal |
| + | A substantial public technical writing record lets a hiring buyer evaluate expertise before ever making contact |
| + | 30 years of operating history under the same founder gives continuity most larger firms can't offer |
| + | Team size of 1 to 10 means zero layers 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 specific, checkable seniority claim |
| + | Systems engineering scope puts firmware engineers on the same team as mechanical and electrical staff, not a separate silo |
| + | Two US locations near San Diego and Minneapolis give onsite coverage options |
| + | 21 years of operating history in medical device and biotech instrumentation work |
| - | 48 to 60 engineers caps how many large concurrent programs the team can staff at once |
| - | No published pricing or minimum engagement figure |
| - | Firmware is one discipline inside a broader systems-engineering team, not a standalone firmware-only group |
Who should choose RMB Consulting?
A typical fit: hiring a single, deeply experienced engineer for a bare-metal firmware project.
30-plus years of hands-on embedded engineering experience concentrated in a single named principal with a public technical record. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial, Consumer electronics, Medical devices.
Who should choose NOVO Engineering?
A typical fit: hiring a multi-discipline team spanning mechanical, electrical, and firmware.
Engineering team averaging 16 years of experience per engineer, a specific and checkable seniority claim. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hiring a single, deeply experienced engineer for a bare-metal firmware project | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Second-opinion technical review from someone with a long public track record | Strong | Limited | RMB Consulting |
| Hiring a multi-discipline team spanning mechanical, electrical, and firmware | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Biotech instrumentation development needing senior, cross-discipline engineers | 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 Embedded Firmware Development projects. 30-plus years of hands-on embedded engineering experience concentrated in a single named principal with a public technical record.
NOVO Engineering (4.1/5) is worth a look if you need biotech instrumentation development needing senior, cross-discipline engineers. 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 engineering experience concentrated in one named, publicly verifiable principal. NOVO Engineering's strongest advantage: engineering team averages 16 years of experience per engineer, a specific, checkable seniority claim.
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 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 developer 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 with a public technical record. NOVO Engineering's primary differentiator is: engineering team averaging 16 years of experience per engineer, a specific and checkable seniority claim. 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 developer before making a decision.