Hi there,
So some fresh info on the differences between Nrf’s
Processing power and efficiency
| Scenario | nRF54L15/10/05 | nRF52840 |
|---|---|---|
| CPU running Coremark from NVM, cache enabled | 500 CoreMark score (3.90 / MHz) | 212 CoreMark score (3.3 / MHz) |
| Processing efficiency | 20 µA/MHz(CPU running CoreMark from | |
| NVM / 128 MHz) | 52 µA/MHz(CPU running CoreMark | |
| from NVM / 64 MHz) | ||
| CPU running CoreMark from NVM, Cache enabled | 2.6 mA | 3.3 mA |
The nRF54L Series has a 128 MHz CPU speed, which is double the 64 MHz speed of the nRF52840 SoC. Combined with a slightly higher CoreMark score per MHz, this results in a 135% increase in the overall CoreMark score compared to the nRF52840 SoC. Additionally, the active current is reduced by 21%, dropping from 3.3 mA to 2.6 mA. The nRF54L Series also achieves 62% improvement in processing efficiency, measured in µA/MHz.
The bottom line is that the nRF54L Series can perform more computations in less time and with lower energy consumption. Reduced execution time allows the device to return to sleep faster, increasing the overall sleep time, which further lowers the average power consumption.
Sleep
| Scenario | nRF54L15/10/05 | nRF52840 |
|---|---|---|
| System ON, 256 KB RAM retention | 2.9 µA | 2.35 µA |
| System ON, no RAM retention | 0.7 µA | 0.97 µA |
| System OFF with Global RTC wakeup | 0.9 µA | RTC unavailable in System OFF* |
| System OFF | 0.7 µA | 0.4 µA |
While the nRF54L Series significantly reduces active and idle current in several key scenarios, you will notice that some values are higher than on the nRF52840 SoC. This is primarily due to the higher leakage associated with a smaller process node, which can lead to slightly higher sleep current in specific scenarios.
Additionally, the nRF54L Series features a System OFF mode with Global RTC wakeup, which is not available on the nRF52 Series. This mode offers lower current consumption than the alternatives available on the nRF52840 SoC, enabling deeper sleep in more use cases. The closest alternative on the nRF52840 SoC is System ON with RTC wakeup, which consumes 1.5 µA, which is 87.5% more power.
I hope they can move it to the next Package just released same physical size but 4 or more additional IO’ pins.
not 100 % but if they are using the “QFN48” the same size “QFN52” has 4 more IO pins ,so lets dial it in Seeedineers. 
onboard Flash or RRAM. (second-slot) capable.
HTH
GL 
PJ 
and bring back m_y RGB LED 
