This article is sourced from: Intelligent Communication Positioning Circle
The “2026 China High-Precision Positioning Technology Industry White Paper” is currently in the research phase, and the companies surveyed so far include:
Changsha Chixin Semiconductor Technology Co., Ltd.
Shenzhen Newray Semiconductor Technology Co., Ltd.
Jiangsu Zhuosheng Microelectronics Co., Ltd.
Shenzhen Jieyang Microelectronics Co., Ltd.
Shenzhen Huayun Shikong Technology Co., Ltd.
Shenzhen Omi Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd.
Realtak
Beijing Hanwei Chuangxin Electronic Technology Co., Ltd.
Hefei Mingxin Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd.
Huizhou Desay SV Automotive Electronics Co., Ltd.
Shenzhen Tiangong Measurement and Control Technology Co., Ltd.
Shenzhen Xibang Technology Co., Ltd.
Hangzhou Youzhilian Technology Co., Ltd.
Anhui Ousiwei Technology Co., Ltd.
Shenzhen Kewai Information Technology Co., Ltd.
Shenzhen Feirui Intelligent Co., Ltd.
Chengdu Zhifou Ruida Technology Co., Ltd.
Shenzhen Feimiao Technology Co., Ltd.
……
We welcome more companies to participate in the research; contact information can be found at the end of the article.
Recently, during our research on high-precision positioning technology companies, some industry friends shared a viewpoint with us:If the goal is merely to create positioning scenarios, Bluetooth 6.0’s Channel Sounding is already sufficient. This article will explore this topic together with our readers.
First, let’s discuss the logic behind the belief that Bluetooth CS’s positioning accuracy is sufficient.
The belief that Bluetooth CS’s positioning capability is good enough can be understood from three perspectives: the first is that Bluetooth CS’s positioning capability has indeed improved significantly; the second is that in many real-world applications, high positioning accuracy is not always necessary; and the third is cost considerations.
Starting with the first point, Bluetooth CS’s positioning capability has indeed improved compared to the current Bluetooth RSSI, mainly reflected in:
First, the improvement in positioning accuracy. Bluetooth CS uses two modes for distance measurement: Phase-Based Ranging (PBR) and Round-Trip Time (RTT). The commonly advertised positioning accuracy is around 0.6m, and under ideal testing conditions, it can achieve 0.2-0.3m. This is a significant improvement compared to the meter-level accuracy of Bluetooth RSSI.
Second, the improvement in stability. This is mainly in comparison to RSSI, where the signal can easily fluctuate, leading to unstable positioning performance, while Bluetooth CS is much more stable.
Third, the improvement in security. Bluetooth CS signals include timestamps (which Bluetooth RSSI does not), effectively preventing relay attacks.
Compared to Bluetooth RSSI, Bluetooth CS not only improves positioning accuracy but also significantly enhances stability and security, which are crucial for its commercial use.
Looking at the second point, in many real-world applications, high precision is often not required. For example, in the digital car key scenario, the most commonly used technology is still Bluetooth RSSI, but the RSSI experience is not good. The main issue is not the lack of accuracy but rather the instability of the signal, which can lead to “penalty standing”. Once the stability issue is resolved, the biggest pain point in this scenario is also addressed.
In scenarios like chemical plants, the most commonly used solution is also Bluetooth RSSI, as this market is mainly policy-driven. The policy does not demand high precision; as long as there is a personnel positioning system, it suffices (in contrast, coal mine policies enforce strict positioning accuracy, hence UWB solutions are used there).
The third point is cost. From the information currently available, Bluetooth CS chips are more expensive than Bluetooth RSSI but cheaper than UWB. Additionally, the Bluetooth ecosystem is more mature than UWB, which may lead to a faster commercial adoption of Bluetooth CS.
The above summarizes the viewpoints and logic supporting Bluetooth CS in the industry. Next, I would like to share my own thoughts.
1. I agree with the logic supporting Bluetooth CS, as there are indeed many scenarios where centimeter-level positioning accuracy is not necessary, and a slightly lower accuracy is acceptable to most users.
2. Bluetooth CS requires new chips due to changes in the physical layer, so previous devices like smartphones cannot support Bluetooth CS through OTA upgrades. However, even so, Bluetooth CS will likely enter smartphones faster than UWB, given the more mature Bluetooth ecosystem.
3. In scenarios that truly require high precision, Bluetooth CS may not be sufficient, such as in pointing remote controls or tracking applications.
4. I personally believe that the cost and power consumption advantages of Bluetooth CS are not significant. In terms of cost, UWB chip prices are rapidly decreasing due to the many domestic UWB chip manufacturers, leading to price competition, and this trend will likely continue. Meanwhile, Bluetooth CS is slightly more expensive than previous Bluetooth versions, so the cost difference between the two may not be substantial.
In terms of power consumption, Bluetooth CS consumes significantly more power than BLE, while UWB chip power consumption has also been reduced significantly after simplifying many functions and optimizing technologies.
5. I am more optimistic about the comprehensive capabilities of UWB, especially its radar sensing capabilities, which have considerable potential. Over the past year, we have seen many breakthroughs in the application of UWB in radar sensing.
For example, in the automotive market, the car key is just a basic entry-level function, while the combination of car key + in-car child detection radar (CPD) + kick radar is its ultimate selling point.
Currently, domestic automotive manufacturers (like Zeekr) have already commercialized a solution based on UWB that includes car key + CPD + kick radar; it is reported that in the two-wheeler market, digital car keys + rearview mirror radar products are also about to be commercialized.
For the latest market information on high-precision positioning technology, feel free to add the analyst’s personal WeChat:
~END~
One-click triple connection, this time for sure!
Click to share
Click to save
Click to view
Click to like