hardwareedge-aibuying-guide

Choosing the Right Hardware for On-Device Generative AI: Raspberry Pi 5 vs NVIDIA Jetson vs Custom RISC-V + NVLink

aappcreators

2026-02-07

11 min read

A practical framework to choose Raspberry Pi 5, Jetson, or RISC‑V+NVLink for on‑device generative AI—compare inference, throughput, power and scale.

Hook — Why on-device generative AI choice is now the limiting factor for on-device generative AI

You want to ship local generative AI features — low latency, low cost, private inference — but you’re stuck choosing between hobbyist boards, embedded GPUs and a still-emerging RISC‑V + NVLink future. The wrong pick wastes months, drives up power bills, and kills product velocity.

Executive summary (most important guidance first)

In 2026 you can broadly choose three hardware approaches for on-device generative AI:

Raspberry Pi 5 + AI HAT+ — lowest cost, fastest prototyping for small models and conversational assistants at the edge.
NVIDIA Jetson family — mature GPU acceleration, best for higher-throughput, larger models, and commercial edge appliances.
RISC‑V + NVLink platforms (emerging) — offers future scale and coherent GPU fabric for multi‑GPU edge nodes; ideal for clustered edge servers and private inference clouds once available.

Use the decision framework below if your priorities are latency, throughput, power, cost, or scale. For prototypes pick Pi5 + AI HAT+; for production edge services pick Jetson; for multi‑GPU clustered edge and advanced memory pooling, plan for RISC‑V + NVLink as silicon and reference platforms emerge in 2026–2027.

Why 2026 is different — trends that change the calculus

Two developments in late 2025 and early 2026 shifted the on-device generative AI landscape:

Raspberry Pi's AI HAT+ (covered by ZDNET in late 2025) made affordable NPUs available to Pi 5 owners, enabling small LLMs and multimodal models on the $100–$200 price band.
SiFive announced integration with NVIDIA's NVLink Fusion (reported Jan 2026 by Forbes/Techmeme), signaling a RISC‑V ecosystem that can coherently attach to NVIDIA GPUs and enable multi‑GPU edge fabrics.

That means: hobbyist boards now support usable generative AI, and a plausible high‑performance RISC‑V + NVLink path exists for future clustered edge appliances.

Decision framework: map your app class to hardware

Use a short checklist to pick the right hardware. Score the following requirements as High/Medium/Low and follow the recommendations below.

Latency sensitivity — real-time inference (sub‑100ms) vs interactive (100–500ms) vs batch.
Throughput — requests per second and concurrent sessions.
Model size and precision — tiny (<=1B), small (1–7B), medium (7–13B), large (13B+); quantized vs FP16/INT8.
Power budget — battery, thermally constrained edge, or wall power with active cooling.
Cost & scale — single‑device deployment vs dozens vs clustered edge servers.
Software stack & integrations — need for CUDA/TensorRT vs ONNX/llama.cpp or vendor NPUs.

Quick mapping

If latency is critical and model <= 7B quantized, Pi 5 + AI HAT+ or Jetson Nano/Orin Nano are valid. Prototyping favors Pi5; production favors Jetson for reliability and tooling.
If throughput is medium to high or models > 7B, pick Jetson family (Orin NX/AGX) — GPUs and TensorRT scale better than current hobbyist NPUs.
If you need multi‑GPU coherent memory and future-proof scale (clustered edge nodes), plan around upcoming RISC‑V + NVLink platforms; start architecting for NVLink fusion now.

Platform deep dives

Raspberry Pi 5 + AI HAT+

The Raspberry Pi 5 plus the AI HAT+ (released to market in late 2025) is a game‑changer for makers and teams that must prototype quickly with minimal budget. The HAT+ attaches to the Pi 5 and exposes an NPU accelerator optimized for quantized inference workloads.

Strengths:

Cost-effective — total kit cost is low relative to Jetson, enabling distributed prototypes and scale-out pilots.
Fast prototyping — works with lightweight runtimes (ggml/llama.cpp, ONNX runtimes for NPUs) and standard Pi OS tooling.
Low power — fits battery and thermally constrained form factors.

Limitations:

Not designed for large model FP16/INT8 throughput — expect to use quantized small/medium models.
Less mature tooling and fewer production‑grade drivers than NVIDIA's stack.
Memory and I/O constraints limit concurrent sessions and throughput.

NVIDIA Jetson family (Orin Nano to AGX Orin)

Jetson devices remain the default for embedded GPU acceleration. NVIDIA provides a mature stack (CUDA, cuDNN, TensorRT, DeepStream) and a clear upgrade path from low‑power Nano devices to AGX modules for high throughput.

Strengths:

High throughput — GPU inference (FP16/INT8) and TensorRT optimizations deliver much higher RPS for medium/large models.
Mature ecosystem — production tools, remote management, fleet orchestration, and security best practices.
Flexible power profiles — configurable TDP modes for performance vs power tradeoffs.

Limitations:

Higher device cost and more complex thermal design (active cooling for AGX).
NVLink is not standard on current Jetson modules; multi‑GPU scaling across Jetsons requires networking or custom interconnects.

RISC‑V + NVLink (emerging)

The SiFive + NVIDIA NVLink Fusion announcement in early 2026 signals a new class of edge nodes: RISC‑V control processors tightly coupled to NVIDIA GPUs over NVLink. These platforms promise coherent GPU fabrics without x86 overhead.

Strengths (potential):

Coherent multi‑GPU — NVLink Fusion enables pooled GPU memory and lower‑latency multi‑GPU execution for very large models and high throughput.
Energy efficient CPU host — RISC‑V cores are lean and power‑efficient as host processors.
Edge clusters — NVLink across GPUs at the node level enables near‑datacenter performance in edge racks.

Limitations and caveats:

Platform maturity is emerging — expect SDKs, drivers, and partner appliances to mature through 2026–2027.
Initial availability and cost are uncertain; consider as a roadmap target rather than immediate production choice unless your vendor provides a reference platform.

Benchmarking and validation: what to measure (and how)

Accurate benchmarks save deployment headaches. Focus on three repeatable metrics: latency p50/p95, throughput (RPS), and power (watts). Combine them into throughput-per-watt for quick comparisons.

Essential measurements

Cold-start latency (model load time)
Steady-state latency p50/p95 across concurrent sessions
Requests per second under controlled concurrency
Average power draw during inference (use hardware power meter or platform tools)
Memory utilization and swap behavior

Sample commands and snippets

Run a small PyTorch inference on Jetson using TensorRT (conceptual example):

FROM nvcr.io/nvidia/l4t-pytorch:r35.3-pth2
WORKDIR /app
COPY model.engine /app
COPY infer.py /app
CMD ["python3","infer.py"]

Simple benchmarking script (conceptual):

# infer.py (conceptual)
import time
import torch
engine = load_tensor_rt("model.engine")
input = random_input()
# warmup
for _ in range(10): engine.run(input)
# benchmark
start = time.time()
for _ in range(100): engine.run(input)
end = time.time()
print("RPS:", 100 / (end - start))

On Jetson use tegrastats to observe GPU/CPU and power trends during the run. On Pi measure wall power or use INA sensors where available.

Operational metrics: cost, power and scaling math

Use these simple formulas to compare options when sizing fleets.

Throughput per watt = RPS / average watts during inference (see best practices for carbon-aware comparisons).
Cost per million inferences = (Device cost / projected lifetime minutes * power cost per minute + cloud/bandwidth fees + maintenance) / (RPS * lifetime minutes / 1,000,000).

Example calculation (abstract): if Device A does 10 RPS at 10W and Device B does 50 RPS at 40W, throughput-per-watt is 1 vs 1.25 — Device B is more efficient at scale despite higher power.

Deployment patterns and recommended stacks

Prototype / single‑device pilots

Recommended: Raspberry Pi 5 + AI HAT+. Use ggml/llama.cpp for quantized LLMs or vendor NPU runtimes where available. Keep models < 7B or aggressively quantize to 4-bit/3-bit for practical performance.

Install Pi OS and the AI HAT+ runtime from vendor.
Use prequantized models (4-bit/8-bit) and test with llama.cpp or ONNX runtimes.
Measure latency and memory; add swap cautiously and prefer model sharding if necessary.

Production single‑node edge services

Recommended: Jetson Orin NX / AGX depending on throughput needs. Use containerized TensorRT pipelines and a lightweight model server (Flask + Triton for larger stacks).

Build a TensorRT engine from your PyTorch model on a workstation with the same CUDA version.
Deploy engine in a Docker container on Jetson; use systemd or k3s for lifecycle management.
Use health‑checks and redundant failover nodes for critical services.

Clustered edge or private inference clouds

Recommended: target RISC‑V + NVLink platforms as they become available, or build custom x86/NVIDIA GPU nodes with fast interconnects today. Plan your software to support distributed model parallelism (tensor or pipeline parallelism) and memory pooling.

Adopt runtimes that support multi‑GPU (DeepSpeed, Megatron‑LM adaptations, NVIDIA's distributed runtimes).
Architect for elastic scaling — offload less latency‑sensitive tasks to cloud or centralized inference nodes.

Security, maintainability and fleet operations

Don’t neglect patching, model provenance and secure boot. Jetson benefits from NVIDIA's enterprise tools; Pi ecosystems require tighter discipline for OTA updates. RISC‑V platforms will need integrators’ firmware and driver validation.

Use signed firmware and secure boot where possible.
Containerize models and runtimes for reproducible deployments.
Implement telemetry and remote debugging hooks before shipping devices.

Case studies and real‑world examples (experience-driven)

- A consumer product team used Raspberry Pi 5 + AI HAT+ to prototype an offline voice assistant; they reduced prototype cost by 70% versus Jetson and validated the UX before committing to an Orin NX design for volume production.

- An industrial partner deployed Jetson Orin NX nodes inside manufacturing equipment to run multimodal inspection models. The maturity of TensorRT and remote management simplified long‑term operations and model updates.

- System architects evaluating rack-level edge appliances are designing around RISC‑V + NVLink reference specifications to take advantage of coherent GPU fabrics for model shard placement and low-latency cross‑GPU memory access. Early benchmarks shared by partners show promise but emphasize the need for updated runtimes.

Practical checklist before you buy

Define your target model(s) and quantization strategy — test real workloads.
Measure cold-start and steady-state latency on representative hardware.
Estimate power and cost per inference for projected fleet sizes.
Check software support: vendor NPUs vs CUDA/TensorRT vs ONNX/llama.cpp compatibility.
Plan for OTA updates, secure boot, and telemetry from day one.
Build a migration path: prototype on Pi5, validate on Jetson, move to RISC‑V + NVLink when the platform and SDKs meet your needs.

Advanced strategy: hybrid topologies and model partitioning

For many deployments a hybrid approach wins: tiny models and prompt orchestration on Pi-class devices, with heavyweight generations routed to Jetson or local NVLink clusters. This reduces power on endpoint devices while maintaining capability.

Consider split‑execution:

Local pre‑processing and intent detection on Pi5 + AI HAT+.
Full generation on Jetson or NVLink cluster when longer responses or larger models are required.

"In 2026 it’s less about a single winning board and more about the right architecture: cheap endpoints, powerful local nodes, and a roadmap to NVLink fabrics where needed." — Practical takeaway for engineering teams

Predictions for 2026–2028

- Expect richer vendor NPUs on hobbyist boards and standardized runtimes (late 2026).

- RISC‑V + NVLink reference platforms and SDKs will appear through 2026 and into 2027, unlocking efficient multi‑GPU edge racks.

- Tooling convergence: ONNX + vendor backends + TensorRT-like optimizers will make model targeting across Pi, Jetson and NVLink easier by 2027.

Final recommendations — pick with confidence

If you need fast, cheap prototypes and your models are small/quantized: start with Raspberry Pi 5 + AI HAT+.
If you need production reliability and higher throughput: standardize on NVIDIA Jetson (Orin NX/AGX) and invest in TensorRT pipelines and fleet tooling.
If you need multi‑GPU coherence and large-model edge clusters: design for RISC‑V + NVLink as a roadmap and engage vendors for early access when you need scale.

Actionable next steps (30/60/90 day plan)

30 days: Prototype on Pi5 + AI HAT+ with a quantized 7B model; measure p50/p95 latency and power.
60 days: Re-run tests on a Jetson dev board; build a TensorRT engine and compare throughput-per-watt. Assess remote management options.
90 days: Create a production plan. If you need clustered inference, contact vendors about RISC‑V + NVLink reference platforms and validate multi‑GPU runtimes.

Closing summary

Choosing the right edge hardware for generative AI in 2026 requires matching your model size, latency and throughput needs to platform strengths. Pi 5 + AI HAT+ accelerates prototyping and low-power endpoints, Jetson remains the best choice for production edge GPU acceleration today, and RISC‑V + NVLink promises a future of coherent, high‑performance clustered edge nodes. Use the decision framework and benchmark recipes above to avoid costly rework.

Call to action

Ready to pick hardware for your next on‑device generative AI project? Start with our 30/60/90 checklist and request a tailored evaluation plan from our engineering team — we’ll help you benchmark models, automate deployments and build a migration path to NVLink‑enabled edge servers.

appcreators

Contributor

Senior editor and content strategist. Writing about technology, design, and the future of digital media. Follow along for deep dives into the industry's moving parts.