Punch Through vs eInfochips: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Punch Through (4.3/5) edges ahead of eInfochips (4.0/5) overall. Punch Through is the better choice for bluetooth LE products with companion mobile apps. eInfochips is the stronger option for large device programmes needing many engineers. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Punch Through vs eInfochips: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Punch Through | eInfochips |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2009 | 1994 |
| HQ | Minneapolis–Saint Paul, MN, USA | San Jose, California, USA (engineering HQ: Ahmedabad, India) |
| Team size | 11–50 | 1,000–5,000 |
| Rating | 4.3 / 5 | 4.0 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Bluetooth LE firmware and mobile apps built by the same team, with deep radio-level debugging experience | Thousands of embedded engineers and broad chip-vendor partnerships, backed by Arrow |
| Pricing model | Time & materials, fixed project | Time & materials, dedicated team, offshore development centre |
| Min. engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Primary tech stack | C, Zephyr, FreeRTOS | C, C++, Embedded Linux |
| Industries served | Medical devices, Consumer electronics | Medical devices, Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Semiconductors, Aerospace & defence |
Punch Through vs eInfochips: overview
Punch Through
Few firms go as deep on Bluetooth LE as Punch Through. The Minnesota company was founded in 2009 by Colin Karpfinger and employs somewhere between 11 and 50 people according to directory listings. It builds connected products where the radio link is the hard part: device firmware on Nordic, Silicon Labs and TI chips, plus the iOS and Android apps that pair with them. Its public guides on BLE throughput, pairing and power use are widely read by embedded engineers. A large share of its client work is medical and consumer health devices.
eInfochips
Arrow Electronics bought eInfochips in early 2018, when it had about 1,500 employees; it has since grown to well over 3,000 by directory counts. The company dates from 1994, has its main engineering base in Ahmedabad, India, and is headquartered in San Jose. Its services cover silicon design, embedded hardware and firmware, video and camera systems, device security and cloud, and it holds design partnerships with most major chip vendors. For firmware buyers it offers capacity and reference designs; the trade-off is a large-company engagement model.
Services and capabilities: Punch Through vs eInfochips
| Capability | Punch Through | eInfochips |
|---|---|---|
| Bare-metal & RTOS firmware | ✓ | ✓ |
| Embedded Linux & BSP | ✗ | ✓ |
| Electronics & PCB design | ✗ | ✓ |
| Wireless & IoT connectivity | ✓ | ✗ |
| Secure boot & OTA | ✗ | ✓ |
| FPGA development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Firmware testing & HIL | ✓ | ✓ |
| Dedicated team model | ✗ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: Punch Through vs eInfochips
| Framework / platform | Punch Through | eInfochips |
|---|---|---|
| FreeRTOS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Zephyr | ✓ | N/A |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | ✓ |
| Yocto | N/A | ✓ |
| AUTOSAR | N/A | N/A |
| STM32 | N/A | N/A |
| Nordic | ✓ | N/A |
| NXP | N/A | ✓ |
| FPGA | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Punch Through vs eInfochips
| Criterion | Punch Through | eInfochips |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Engagement models | Consulting, Fixed project, Time & materials | Dedicated team, Fixed project, Time & materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Punch Through vs eInfochips
| Dimension | Punch Through | eInfochips |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Mid-market to enterprise |
| Best industries | Medical devices, Consumer electronics | Medical devices, Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics |
| Best use cases | Fixing dropped connections between a BLE wearable and its iOS app, Building firmware and a companion app for a connected glucose or heart-rate device | Staffing a 30-person firmware and validation team for a medical platform, Building a smart-camera product on a Qualcomm processor |
| Typical project type | Consulting | Dedicated team |
Punch Through vs eInfochips: pros and cons
| Punch Through | |
|---|---|
| + | Firmware and mobile apps from one team removes the usual finger-pointing over BLE connection bugs |
| + | Published technical guides show real depth in BLE throughput, pairing and power optimization |
| + | Experience with connected medical products and their data-integrity requirements |
| - | Narrow focus on Bluetooth LE makes it a weaker fit for cellular, wired or Linux-class products |
| - | Small team, so availability can be limited |
| - | US rates are among the higher ones on this list |
| eInfochips | |
|---|---|
| + | Can staff large teams quickly, including validation and test engineers |
| + | Camera, video and edge AI work on Qualcomm and NXP platforms |
| + | Arrow ownership helps with component supply and reference designs |
| - | Owned by Arrow Electronics since 2018, so ask how silicon recommendations are made |
| - | Large-company processes add overhead for small projects |
| - | Engineer quality can vary between teams in a company this size |
Who should choose Punch Through?
A typical fit: fixing dropped connections between a BLE wearable and its iOS app.
Bluetooth LE firmware and mobile apps built by the same team, with deep radio-level debugging experience. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Medical devices, Consumer electronics.
Who should choose eInfochips?
A typical fit: staffing a 30-person firmware and validation team for a medical platform.
Thousands of embedded engineers and broad chip-vendor partnerships, backed by Arrow. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Medical devices, Industrial IoT, Consumer electronics, Semiconductors, Aerospace & defence.
Decision matrix: Punch Through vs eInfochips
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Punch Through |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | eInfochips |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Punch Through (Not disclosed) vs eInfochips (Not disclosed) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | eInfochips |
| You need engineers to extend your own firmware team | eInfochips |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Both may offer discovery engagements |
Use case fit: Punch Through vs eInfochips
| Use case | Punch Through fit | eInfochips fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fixing dropped connections between a BLE wearable and its iOS app | Strong | Limited | Punch Through |
| Building firmware and a companion app for a connected glucose or heart-rate device | Strong | Limited | Punch Through |
| Staffing a 30-person firmware and validation team for a medical platform | Limited | Strong | eInfochips |
| Building a smart-camera product on a Qualcomm processor | Limited | Strong | eInfochips |
| Fixed-price firmware build | Strong | Strong | Both |
| Extending an in-house firmware team | Strong | Strong | Both |
Verdict: Punch Through vs eInfochips
Punch Through (4.3/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Firmware Development projects. Bluetooth LE firmware and mobile apps built by the same team, with deep radio-level debugging experience.
eInfochips (4.0/5) is worth a look if you need building a smart-camera product on a Qualcomm processor. If your situation matches that, eInfochips is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Punch Through vs eInfochips FAQ
Is Punch Through better than eInfochips?
Punch Through (4.3/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Punch Through's strongest advantage: firmware and mobile apps from one team removes the usual finger-pointing over BLE connection bugs. eInfochips's strongest advantage: can staff large teams quickly, including validation and test engineers.
How do Punch Through and eInfochips differ in pricing?
Punch Through uses time & materials, fixed project pricing. eInfochips uses time & materials, dedicated team, offshore development centre pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Punch Through or eInfochips?
eInfochips is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each service provider before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between Punch Through and eInfochips?
Punch Through's primary differentiator is: bluetooth LE firmware and mobile apps built by the same team, with deep radio-level debugging experience. eInfochips's primary differentiator is: thousands of embedded engineers and broad chip-vendor partnerships, backed by Arrow. They also differ in team size (11–50 vs 1,000–5,000), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not disclosed), and primary industries served (Medical devices, Consumer electronics vs Medical devices, Industrial IoT).
Verify all details directly with each service provider before making a decision.