Arduino Nano RP2040 Connect vs Raspberry Pi Pico 2 W: Wireless RP2040/RP2350 Compared

The Arduino Nano RP2040 Connect and Raspberry Pi Pico 2 W are both wireless boards from the Raspberry Pi microcontroller family, but they belong to different generations.

Nano RP2040 Connect is based on the original:

while Pico 2 W uses the newer:

Both add wireless using a separate radio chip rather than integrating Wi-Fi/Bluetooth into the main MCU.

But the board philosophies are very different:

Quick Comparison

Feature	Nano RP2040 Connect	Raspberry Pi Pico 2 W
Main MCU	RP2040	RP2350A
CPU	Dual Cortex-M0+	Dual Cortex-M33 or dual Hazard3 RISC-V
Clock	133 MHz	150 MHz
SRAM	264 kB	520 kB
Flash	16 MB QSPI	4 MB QSPI
PIO state machines	8	12
Wireless chip	u-blox NINA-W102	Infineon CYW43439
Wi-Fi	2.4 GHz	2.4 GHz 802.11n
Bluetooth	Via NINA-W102	Bluetooth 5.2, Classic + BLE
User GPIO	20 digital-capable positions, with A6/A7 exceptions	26 exposed GPIO
Analog-labelled inputs	8	3 external ADC GPIO
Native main-MCU ADC	4 RP2040 ADC inputs	3 exposed RP2350 ADC inputs
IMU	LSM6DSOX onboard	No
Microphone	MP34DT06J onboard	No
Secure element	ATECC608A	No separate secure element; RP2350 has built-in security features
USB	Micro-USB	Micro-USB
Input supply	VIN 4-20 V	VSYS 1.8-5.5 V
Form factor	18 × 45 mm Nano	21 × 51 mm Pico
2026 status	Arduino marks it End of Life	Current; production commitment to at least Jan 2040

RP2350 Is a Major Upgrade over RP2040

Pico 2 W’s biggest advantage is not wireless. Both boards already have wireless.

Its biggest advantage is the newer RP2350.

Compared with RP2040, RP2350 adds:

• higher clock speed;
• roughly twice the SRAM;
• Cortex-M33 instead of Cortex-M0+;
• hardware floating point and DSP instructions;
• optional Hazard3 RISC-V cores;
• stronger security;
• more PIO resources;
• better low-power modes.

CPU: Cortex-M0+ vs Cortex-M33

Nano RP2040 Connect runs:

Pico 2 W can run:

or:

The M33 cores are much more capable than the M0+ cores for:

• floating-point processing;
• DSP;
• audio processing;
• control algorithms;
• larger RTOS applications.

RISC-V Is Unique to RP2350

RP2350 can also boot using its pair of Hazard3 RISC-V cores.

This does not mean it runs Arm and RISC-V simultaneously as four independent cores.

You select which pair of cores the system uses.

For developers interested in RISC-V, Pico 2 W is therefore far more interesting than Nano RP2040 Connect.

SRAM: Pico 2 W Nearly Doubles It

Nano RP2040 Connect:

Pico 2 W:

This extra RAM helps with:

• MicroPython;
• network buffers;
• graphics;
• audio;
• larger lookup tables;
• RTOS tasks;
• TLS workloads.

Flash: Nano RP2040 Connect Wins Clearly

Nano RP2040 Connect provides:

Pico 2 W provides:

So the older Arduino board has four times as much onboard Flash.

This is useful for:

• larger filesystems;
• MicroPython modules;
• web assets;
• stored data;
• large firmware images.

PIO: Pico 2 W Has 12 State Machines

RP2040 has:

RP2350 expands that to:

PIO can implement:

• custom serial protocols;
• extra UART/SPI-like interfaces;
• WS2812 output;
• quadrature decoding;
• precise pulse generation;
• high-speed custom buses.

If your project is PIO-heavy, Pico 2 W is the stronger platform.

Wireless Architecture: Both Use a Separate Radio Chip

Nano RP2040 Connect uses:

Pico 2 W uses:

So neither main MCU contains an integrated Wi-Fi radio.

NINA-W102 vs CYW43439

The NINA-W102 is an ESP32-based wireless module with its own CPU, memory and firmware.

Arduino normally communicates with it through:

The CYW43439 used on Pico 2 W is a dedicated wireless device controlled through Raspberry Pi’s CYW43 software stack.

Raspberry Pi documents:

• 2.4 GHz 802.11n Wi-Fi;
• WPA3;
• soft AP support;
• Bluetooth 5.2;
• BLE central and peripheral roles;
• Bluetooth Classic support.

Pico 2 W Has a More Direct RP2350 Wireless Software Stack

On Pico 2 W, the RP2350 runs the host-side networking environment while the CYW43439 handles the radio subsystem.

On Nano RP2040 Connect, Arduino’s normal wireless model is more explicitly based on the NINA firmware acting as a coprocessor.

Both approaches work well, but their software ecosystems are different.

Arduino Software Support

Nano RP2040 Connect has official Arduino support.

In 2026, Arduino also added Nano RP2040 Connect to the stable:

line after Zephyr support left beta.

That is an interesting situation:

Pico 2 W Arduino Support

Pico 2 W is widely used from Arduino IDE through the community:

It supports:

• RP2350;
• Pico 2;
• Pico 2 W;
• Wi-Fi;
• Bluetooth;
• OTA;
• PIO;
• USB.

Raspberry Pi’s own primary software stacks remain its C/C++ SDK and MicroPython.

MicroPython

Both boards support MicroPython.

Pico 2 W benefits from:

while Nano RP2040 Connect benefits from:

So Pico 2 W has more runtime memory, while Nano RP2040 Connect has more persistent storage headroom.

GPIO: Pico 2 W Exposes More Pins

Pico 2 W exposes:

Nano RP2040 Connect is constrained by the Nano form factor.

Arduino lists:

with A6/A7 not behaving as normal RP2040 GPIO.

If a project needs:

• large parallel interfaces;
• many chip selects;
• many interrupt inputs;
• lots of PWM outputs;
• several custom PIO interfaces;

Pico 2 W gives you more room.

Nano RP2040 Connect Has Eight Analog Labels

The Nano header exposes:

but there is an important architectural detail.

Only:

are native RP2040 ADC inputs.

The extra:

are implemented through the NINA-W102 path.

Pico 2 W Has Three Exposed ADC Inputs

Pico 2 W exposes:

as external ADC-capable GPIO.

There is also internal ADC use for system monitoring and temperature sensing.

Analog Simplicity vs Analog Count

Nano RP2040 Connect gives you more analog-labelled positions.

Pico 2 W gives you fewer external analog inputs, but all three are native RP2350 ADC inputs with no NINA-assisted split.

For precision analog work, neither board replaces a good external ADC.

Nano RP2040 Connect Has an Onboard IMU

Arduino includes the:

6-axis IMU.

It provides:

• 3-axis accelerometer;
• 3-axis gyroscope;
• embedded gesture/ML features.

Pico 2 W includes no equivalent onboard IMU.

Nano RP2040 Connect Also Has a Microphone

The board includes an:

digital PDM microphone.

That makes it suitable out of the box for:

• sound analysis;
• keyword spotting;
• TinyML audio projects;
• voice-triggered sensing.

Pico 2 W needs an external microphone.

Security: Different Approaches

Nano RP2040 Connect adds a dedicated:

secure element.

This provides protected cryptographic key storage and hardware security functions.

RP2350 Has Much Stronger Built-In MCU Security

RP2350 adds a modern security architecture including:

• Arm TrustZone;
• signed boot;
• OTP key storage;
• hardware SHA-256;
• hardware true random number generation;
• security-domain assignment;
• fault-injection mitigations.

So Pico 2 W does not need a separate security chip to provide many secure-boot and device-protection features.

USB

Both boards use Micro-USB.

Nano RP2040 Connect exposes the RP2040 USB 1.1 device interface.

Pico 2 W’s RP2350 provides:

with drag-and-drop UF2 bootloader support.

UF2 Recovery Is One of Pico’s Best Features

To recover Pico 2 W:

1. hold BOOTSEL;
2. connect USB;
3. the board appears as USB mass storage;
4. copy a UF2 firmware image.

This is exceptionally robust during development.

Nano RP2040 Connect Recovery

Nano RP2040 Connect also exposes RP2040 recovery/BOOTSEL functionality through its REC mechanism and bootloader behaviour.

Both are much harder to permanently “brick” than many older microcontroller boards.

Power Input

Nano RP2040 Connect supports:

which is unusually wide for a compact wireless microcontroller board.

Pico 2 W supports:

through its flexible power architecture.

Which Power Architecture Is Better?

Nano RP2040 Connect is convenient when the system already has:

• 9 V;
• 12 V;
• higher embedded supply rails within the documented range.

Pico 2 W is more convenient for:

• single-cell battery systems;
• 3.3-5 V regulated rails;
• low-voltage embedded designs.

Board Size

Nano RP2040 Connect measures:

Pico 2 W measures:

The Nano is slightly smaller.

The Pico uses a 40-pin castellated layout that is larger but exposes more GPIO.

Carrier-Board Compatibility

Nano RP2040 Connect fits:

• Nano sockets;
• Nano screw-terminal carriers;
• Nano prototyping boards.

Pico 2 W fits:

• Pico W carrier boards;
• Pico 2 W carrier boards;
• 40-pin Pico accessories.

Pico 2 W intentionally preserves the Pico W external layout.

Pico 2 W Production Longevity

Raspberry Pi currently states that the Pico 2 series will remain in production until at least:

That is a major advantage for:

• commercial products;
• long-lived industrial designs;
• educational hardware;
• projects that require future replacement stock.

Nano RP2040 Connect Is End of Life

Arduino currently marks Nano RP2040 Connect:

That does not make existing boards obsolete in a technical sense.

It does change the recommendation for a new long-term hardware design.

Which Board Is Better for PIO?

Pico 2 W.

It provides:

versus:

on RP2040.

Which Board Is Better for TinyML Sensors?

Nano RP2040 Connect has an immediate convenience advantage because it already includes:

• IMU;
• microphone;
• 16 MB Flash.

Pico 2 W has much more CPU/RAM capability but requires external sensors.

Which Board Is Better for MicroPython?

Pico 2 W is generally the stronger compute platform because of its:

• 520 kB SRAM;
• faster Cortex-M33 cores;
• newer RP2350 architecture;
• Raspberry Pi’s first-party MicroPython focus.

Nano RP2040 Connect remains attractive when the application needs a large 16 MB filesystem.

Which Board Is Better for Wireless Projects?

The answer is more nuanced.

Nano RP2040 Connect has:

• mature WiFiNINA workflow;
• Arduino Cloud integration;
• separate NINA wireless processor.

Pico 2 W has:

• modern CYW43 stack;
• Bluetooth 5.2;
• Pico SDK;
• MicroPython;
• Arduino-Pico;
• long production life.

For a new wireless design in 2026, the newer Pico 2 W platform is much easier to justify.

Which Board Is Better for Existing Arduino Projects?

If you already have a design built around:

• Nano pinout;
• WiFiNINA;
• ArduinoBLE;
• LSM6DSOX;
• PDM microphone;

staying with Nano RP2040 Connect may avoid unnecessary redevelopment while boards remain available.

Which Board Is Better for New Products?

Pico 2 W has the stronger long-term case because:

• RP2350 is newer and more capable;
• Raspberry Pi has committed to long production availability;
• the board is current rather than EOL;
• it exposes more GPIO;
• it has stronger built-in security.

Decision Table

Requirement	Better fit
Faster MCU	Pico 2 W
More SRAM	Pico 2 W
More Flash	Nano RP2040 Connect
More PIO state machines	Pico 2 W
More exposed GPIO	Pico 2 W
Onboard IMU	Nano RP2040 Connect
Onboard microphone	Nano RP2040 Connect
Dedicated secure element	Nano RP2040 Connect
Built-in modern MCU security	Pico 2 W
Wide 4-20 V VIN	Nano RP2040 Connect
Low-voltage 1.8-5.5 V supply	Pico 2 W
Nano carrier compatibility	Nano RP2040 Connect
Pico carrier compatibility	Pico 2 W
Current long-term production platform	Pico 2 W
Arduino Cloud heritage	Nano RP2040 Connect

Quick Reference

Final Thoughts

Nano RP2040 Connect is still an unusually feature-rich RP2040 board.

Its:

• 16 MB Flash;
• IMU;
• microphone;
• ATECC608A;
• Nano form factor;
• WiFiNINA workflow;

make it more than just an RP2040 with Wi-Fi.

But Pico 2 W is the stronger new-generation microcontroller platform.

RP2350 brings:

• faster Cortex-M33 cores;
• optional RISC-V;
• almost twice the RAM;
• 12 PIO state machines;
• stronger built-in security;
• more exposed GPIO;
• long-term product availability.

The simplest decision rule in 2026 is:

For detailed pinouts, see our Nano RP2040 Connect pinout guide, Raspberry Pi Pico 2 W pinout and Arduino guide and RP2040 vs RP2350 comparison.