Jetson Orin Nano vs NX vs AGX Power Consumption (2026)

Platform Specifications

All three platforms use NVIDIA's Ampere GPU architecture. The key differences are compute scale, memory, and power envelope. Data from NVIDIA Jetson module specifications.

Within the family, the NX offers 2.3× the Nano's INT8 throughput and double the memory, at the cost of a higher idle floor; the AGX roughly doubles the NX again on compute and memory bandwidth. For a full Nano vs NX breakdown beyond power (compute, memory, ecosystem), see the Orin Nano vs Orin NX comparison.

Power Consumption Comparison

Measured power draw across workload scenarios. All measurements at 1080p with TensorRT INT8 inference.

Planning estimates based on measured per-mode power profiles. See the detailed Orin Nano power benchmarks for methodology.

The idle gap matters most for always-on deployments. The NX at 7–10W idle burns 50–80% more power than the Nano at 4.5–5.5W just waiting for work — over a year of 24/7 operation, that idle delta alone translates to roughly 20–40 kWh of additional energy per device. The AGX's 12–15W idle floor compounds this further.

The heavy inference row shows where the larger modules earn their power draw. At 13–16W the Nano is near its thermal limit, while the NX at 20–30W still has headroom below its 40W ceiling for burst loads or additional cameras — workloads the Nano physically cannot sustain.

Performance Per Watt Analysis

The Orin Nano delivers the best power efficiency for lightweight models, while the NX and AGX trade efficiency for absolute throughput.

The Orin NX has the best TOPS-per-watt ratio at its default 15W mode (~10.5 TOPS/W). However, the Orin Nano wins on absolute power draw — critical for battery, PoE, and outdoor deployments where total wattage matters more than efficiency ratios.

The Nano also wins on cost-per-stream (~$42 vs ~$50) because it costs less than half the NX while delivering roughly half the streams. That makes it the better value below ~6 cameras — and the better choice when you can deploy two Nano nodes instead of one NX for redundancy. The NX wins on throughput density: one NX replaces two Nanos at similar total module power, but needs only one carrier board, one NVMe drive, and one enclosure.

Power Modes Across Platforms

Each platform supports multiple power modes via nvpmodel. The range and default differ significantly:

The Orin Nano ranges from 7W to 25W — roughly a 3.5× span. The AGX has a 4× span (15W to 60W) but at a much higher baseline. For detailed mode comparison on the Orin Nano, see MAXN vs MAXN Super vs 15W benchmarks.

Deployment Scenario Guide

Battery / Solar Powered

Use Orin Nano at 7W mode. A 20 Wh battery provides 2.5–3 hours at 7W. The Orin NX at minimum 10W mode drains batteries faster with no efficiency advantage for light workloads. The AGX is impractical for battery operation.

PoE Powered (802.3af/at)

Use Orin Nano at 15W mode. Standard PoE (802.3af) delivers 12.95W — enough for the Nano at typical inference. PoE+ (802.3at) at 25.5W supports MAXN Super. The Orin NX exceeds 802.3at for most workloads. See power per camera estimates for multi-camera PoE budgeting.

The PoE standard hierarchy determines which platform fits without infrastructure upgrades:

For retrofit installations where existing switches provide only 802.3af, the Nano is the only viable Jetson without upgrading switch infrastructure — a common constraint in building security and retail deployments where the network switch predates the edge AI upgrade. Use the PoE power budget calculator to size multi-camera systems, and account for cable losses and peripheral loads.

Indoor Multi-Camera (8–16 cameras)

Use Orin NX at 15W or higher mode. Handles 8–12 streams at 1080p/15fps with headroom. The Nano maxes out at ~6 streams. The AGX is overkill and wastes power unless you need 16+ cameras or heavy models.

Large-Scale (16+ cameras)

Use AGX Orin or consider multiple nodes. The AGX handles up to 20 streams at 1080p. Beyond that, the System Designer can model multi-node architectures automatically.

Decision Matrix

The 4–8 camera range is the gray zone where both the Nano (at MAXN Super) and the NX are viable. The deciding factors in this range are: (1) whether the enclosure supports active cooling (the NX requires it), (2) whether the power source provides 15W+ (NX minimum), and (3) whether the model is lightweight (Nano-friendly) or medium-weight (NX-friendly).

For exact sizing, use the Hardware Selector to compare platforms for your specific workload.

Choosing Between Orin Nano and Orin NX

The Nano-vs-NX decision is the most common one, since both target the same multi-camera edge tier. Here is where each platform delivers a clear advantage.

When the Orin Nano wins

• Low camera count (1–6 cameras at 1080p): The Nano handles this comfortably at 8–14W. Using the NX for the same workload wastes power on idle overhead with no throughput benefit.
• Tight power budget (≤15W system): The Nano's 15W default fits with room for a USB camera. The NX draws 10–14W on even light inference, leaving no margin for peripherals.
• Fanless enclosures: Sustained 10–12W is manageable with a passive heatsink in a ventilated enclosure. The NX at 20W+ demands active cooling in nearly all fanless designs.
• Battery-powered deployments: At 7W average draw with INT8 optimization, the Nano provides 40–60% longer battery life than the NX for equivalent single-stream inference. A 30 Wh battery yields 3.5–4.5 hours on the Nano vs ~2 hours on the NX.
• PoE-powered edge nodes: Standard PoE (802.3af) supports the Nano at its default TDP. The NX requires PoE++ infrastructure, which may not be available in retrofit installations.
• Cost-sensitive deployments: At $249 vs $599, the Nano costs 58% less — a $350 saving per node in distributed deployments running light workloads.

When the Orin NX wins

• 6–12 cameras at 1080p: The Nano tops out at ~6 streams. The NX handles ~12 streams at ~28W — more efficient than two Nano nodes, which need two carrier boards, two enclosures, and two power supplies for similar module power.
• Heavier models (YOLO11m, YOLO11l, ResNet-50 FP16): Medium and large models saturate the Nano's 67 TOPS quickly. The NX's 157 TOPS and 16GB of memory allow models that would either not fit or would throttle the Nano.
• Multi-model pipelines: Running detection + classification + tracking simultaneously requires both compute headroom and memory. The NX's 16GB accommodates multiple TensorRT engines without swapping.
• Growth headroom: If the deployment will scale from 4 cameras to 12 over time, starting with the NX avoids a costly platform swap later. Its 15W default runs 4 cameras at roughly 40% GPU utilization, leaving room to grow.
• Indoor grid-powered installations: When power is abundant and heat dissipation is manageable (server rooms, kiosks, fan-cooled industrial enclosures), the NX's higher draw is irrelevant — the extra throughput and memory are pure upside.

Thermal and Cooling Implications

Power consumption directly determines cooling requirements: every watt consumed becomes a watt of heat to dissipate. The thermal design implications differ significantly between the Nano and NX.

The practical difference: the Nano can run fanless in many deployments (outdoor cameras, PoE-powered nodes, sealed enclosures with adequate thermal mass). The NX almost always needs a fan in production, which adds cost, noise, a mechanical failure point, and ingress protection challenges outdoors. The AGX Orin requires active cooling in all configurations. See Jetson thermal limits for when fanless systems start throttling.

FAQ