Armada vs. Sequoia vs. QX80 - Infotainment & Tech Deep Dive

Okay, I'm starting a new discussion because while performance numbers are fun, I spend most of my time interacting with the dashboard. I’ve been doing some research on the tech in these three SUVs, and the differences are bigger than I thought.

• Toyota Sequoia: Has that huge 14-inch horizontal screen. I like the size, and the Toyota system is supposed to be very fast and simple. But it also seems a little... basic? Not a lot of bells and whistles. The JBL sound system seems to be just "okay" from what I've read.
• Nissan Armada NISMO: Gets a new 12.3-inch screen with Google built-in. I like the idea of having Google Maps integrated natively. That's a big plus. It has a Klipsch sound system, which should be pretty good.
• Infiniti QX80: This seems to be on another level entirely. It has two screens, an available 24-speaker Klipsch Reference system, and something called ProPILOT Assist 2.1 that allows for hands-free driving on the highway.

My head is spinning a bit. Is the QX80's tech worth the massive price jump? Is the Sequoia's simplicity a pro or a con? Does anyone have real-world experience with these systems? I'm particularly interested in how responsive they are and how well the voice commands work. A laggy touchscreen is a major pet peeve of mine.

TrailHybrid said:

Okay, I'm starting a new discussion because while performance numbers are fun, I spend most of my time interacting with the dashboard. I’ve been doing some research on the tech in these three SUVs, and the differences are bigger than I thought.

• Toyota Sequoia: Has that huge 14-inch horizontal screen. I like the size, and the Toyota system is supposed to be very fast and simple. But it also seems a little... basic? Not a lot of bells and whistles. The JBL sound system seems to be just "okay" from what I've read.
• Nissan Armada NISMO: Gets a new 12.3-inch screen with Google built-in. I like the idea of having Google Maps integrated natively. That's a big plus. It has a Klipsch sound system, which should be pretty good.
• Infiniti QX80: This seems to be on another level entirely. It has two screens, an available 24-speaker Klipsch Reference system, and something called ProPILOT Assist 2.1 that allows for hands-free driving on the highway.

My head is spinning a bit. Is the QX80's tech worth the massive price jump? Is the Sequoia's simplicity a pro or a con? Does anyone have real-world experience with these systems? I'm particularly interested in how responsive they are and how well the voice commands work. A laggy touchscreen is a major pet peeve of mine.

Click to expand...

You're right to point out that the Infiniti is on another level—that's precisely the point of the brand. I've had a chance to demo the new QX80, and the technology is a core part of the luxury experience.

The 24-speaker Klipsch Reference Premiere system is, without exaggeration, the best audio system I have ever heard in a vehicle. It’s not just loud; the clarity and separation are astounding. It’s like having a high-end home theater on wheels.

And ProPILOT Assist 2.1 is a game-changer for long trips. On mapped highways, you can genuinely take your hands off the wheel. The system handles steering, braking, and acceleration smoothly and confidently. It dramatically reduces driver fatigue. You're not just buying a bigger screen or more speakers; you're buying a more serene and less stressful driving environment. It makes other systems feel antiquated.

TrailHybrid said:

Okay, I'm starting a new discussion because while performance numbers are fun, I spend most of my time interacting with the dashboard. I’ve been doing some research on the tech in these three SUVs, and the differences are bigger than I thought.

• Toyota Sequoia: Has that huge 14-inch horizontal screen. I like the size, and the Toyota system is supposed to be very fast and simple. But it also seems a little... basic? Not a lot of bells and whistles. The JBL sound system seems to be just "okay" from what I've read.
• Nissan Armada NISMO: Gets a new 12.3-inch screen with Google built-in. I like the idea of having Google Maps integrated natively. That's a big plus. It has a Klipsch sound system, which should be pretty good.
• Infiniti QX80: This seems to be on another level entirely. It has two screens, an available 24-speaker Klipsch Reference system, and something called ProPILOT Assist 2.1 that allows for hands-free driving on the highway.

My head is spinning a bit. Is the QX80's tech worth the massive price jump? Is the Sequoia's simplicity a pro or a con? Does anyone have real-world experience with these systems? I'm particularly interested in how responsive they are and how well the voice commands work. A laggy touchscreen is a major pet peeve of mine.

Click to expand...

I look at this list and all I see are more things to break and more distractions. Give me a volume knob, a tuning knob, and six preset buttons and I'm happy.

Now you have to worry about your "user profile" syncing, whether your wireless CarPlay will connect today, and a computer that thinks it can drive better than you. How long until the "hands-free" driving system makes a mistake? How much will it cost to fix one of those giant screens when it inevitably goes black outside of warranty?

It's a race to see who can glue the biggest iPad to the dashboard, and I'm not impressed. The more complicated the tech, the faster it becomes obsolete and the more expensive it is to fix. I'll stick with my simple, reliable buttons, thanks.

I think the Armada NISMO hits the sweet spot here.

I agree with @V8_Loyalist that you can go overboard with tech. I don't need my car to drive itself—I'm buying a NISMO to drive it. The QX80's system sounds impressive, @QX_Luxury, but I see those features as things I'd rarely use that just add to the cost.

Having Google built-in is the key feature for me. That means I don't have to rely on my phone for navigation. Google Maps will always be on, always up-to-date, and I can use "Hey Google" to control things, which works way better than most native car company voice assistants. It's practical, useful tech that improves the drive without trying to take it over. It’s smarter, not just more complicated. For a driver-focused vehicle, that feels like the right choice.

Thanks for the replies, everyone. This is really helpful.

QX_Luxury said:

You're right to point out that the Infiniti is on another level—that's precisely the point of the brand. I've had a chance to demo the new QX80, and the technology is a core part of the luxury experience.

The 24-speaker Klipsch Reference Premiere system is, without exaggeration, the best audio system I have ever heard in a vehicle. It’s not just loud; the clarity and separation are astounding. It’s like having a high-end home theater on wheels.

And ProPILOT Assist 2.1 is a game-changer for long trips. On mapped highways, you can genuinely take your hands off the wheel. The system handles steering, braking, and acceleration smoothly and confidently. It dramatically reduces driver fatigue. You're not just buying a bigger screen or more speakers; you're buying a more serene and less stressful driving environment. It makes other systems feel antiquated.

Click to expand...

I won't deny that the hands-free driving and the 24-speaker stereo sound incredible, but I have to wonder how much I'd really use them. I'm rarely on a long, uninterrupted highway for the ProPILOT 2.1 to be a huge factor, but I can see the appeal.

ArmadaBound said:

I think the Armada NISMO hits the sweet spot here.

I agree with @V8_Loyalist that you can go overboard with tech. I don't need my car to drive itself—I'm buying a NISMO to drive it. The QX80's system sounds impressive, @QX_Luxury, but I see those features as things I'd rarely use that just add to the cost.

Having Google built-in is the key feature for me. That means I don't have to rely on my phone for navigation. Google Maps will always be on, always up-to-date, and I can use "Hey Google" to control things, which works way better than most native car company voice assistants. It's practical, useful tech that improves the drive without trying to take it over. It’s smarter, not just more complicated. For a driver-focused vehicle, that feels like the right choice.

Click to expand...

You make a strong case for the Google built-in system. Having a familiar, powerful navigation system that doesn't rely on my phone's cell signal is a huge plus. My main concern would be system lag. I've been in cars where the native system is powerful but the processor is slow, and it's infuriating to use. A big, beautiful screen is useless if it takes three seconds to respond to every touch.

That's my biggest question for all three: how smooth are they in the real world?

Fascinating discussion. I look at this from a slightly different angle: the software ecosystem and hardware lifecycle.

A big screen is just a monitor. The real questions are about the operating system (OS) and the processor behind it.

- The Nissan/Infiniti systems with Google built-in are based on Android Automotive OS. This is great because it opens the door for third-party apps via the Google Play Store and should, in theory, receive regular over-the-air (OTA) updates directly from Google, not just Nissan. This is a huge advantage for long-term usability.

- Toyota's system is proprietary. It's clean and simple, which is good, but you're locked into their ecosystem. Their OTA updates have historically been for bug fixes, not major new features. You're basically getting a finished product that won't evolve much over time.

Does anyone know what processors these new systems are using? A slow processor can lead to input lag, slow map rendering, and a frustrating experience, especially a few years down the road when the software gets more demanding. A system that's snappy today might be a brick in three years if the hardware isn't robust. To me, the upgradeability and processing power are more important than the screen size or the number of speakers.

V8_Loyalist said:

I look at this list and all I see are more things to break and more distractions. Give me a volume knob, a tuning knob, and six preset buttons and I'm happy.

Now you have to worry about your "user profile" syncing, whether your wireless CarPlay will connect today, and a computer that thinks it can drive better than you. How long until the "hands-free" driving system makes a mistake? How much will it cost to fix one of those giant screens when it inevitably goes black outside of warranty?

It's a race to see who can glue the biggest iPad to the dashboard, and I'm not impressed. The more complicated the tech, the faster it becomes obsolete and the more expensive it is to fix. I'll stick with my simple, reliable buttons, thanks.

Click to expand...

I understand your perspective, but I believe you're viewing this technology as a distraction rather than what it truly is: a workload reduction tool. The purpose of ProPILOT Assist 2.1 isn't to replace the driver; it's to manage the monotonous, high-fatigue portions of a journey so the driver can remain more alert and refreshed for the parts that require their full attention. It is a safety feature, first and foremost.

TechieTom said:

Fascinating discussion. I look at this from a slightly different angle: the software ecosystem and hardware lifecycle.

A big screen is just a monitor. The real questions are about the operating system (OS) and the processor behind it.

- The Nissan/Infiniti systems with Google built-in are based on Android Automotive OS. This is great because it opens the door for third-party apps via the Google Play Store and should, in theory, receive regular over-the-air (OTA) updates directly from Google, not just Nissan. This is a huge advantage for long-term usability.

- Toyota's system is proprietary. It's clean and simple, which is good, but you're locked into their ecosystem. Their OTA updates have historically been for bug fixes, not major new features. You're basically getting a finished product that won't evolve much over time.

Does anyone know what processors these new systems are using? A slow processor can lead to input lag, slow map rendering, and a frustrating experience, especially a few years down the road when the software gets more demanding. A system that's snappy today might be a brick in three years if the hardware isn't robust. To me, the upgradeability and processing power are more important than the screen size or the number of speakers.

Click to expand...

@TechieTom brings up some excellent points about the hardware. Welcome. by the way! While I don't know the specific processor model, I can say that during my demo of the new QX80, the system was flawless. The transition between the upper and lower screens was instant, map rendering was fluid, and there was zero perceptible lag. This is part of the premium experience. Luxury brands understand that the user experience extends to the digital interface. Any hint of lag would shatter the illusion of quality, which is why they tend to use higher-spec hardware than their mainstream counterparts. It's an investment in ensuring the vehicle feels premium and responsive for its entire lifespan.

TechieTom said:

Fascinating discussion. I look at this from a slightly different angle: the software ecosystem and hardware lifecycle.

A big screen is just a monitor. The real questions are about the operating system (OS) and the processor behind it.

- The Nissan/Infiniti systems with Google built-in are based on Android Automotive OS. This is great because it opens the door for third-party apps via the Google Play Store and should, in theory, receive regular over-the-air (OTA) updates directly from Google, not just Nissan. This is a huge advantage for long-term usability.

- Toyota's system is proprietary. It's clean and simple, which is good, but you're locked into their ecosystem. Their OTA updates have historically been for bug fixes, not major new features. You're basically getting a finished product that won't evolve much over time.

Does anyone know what processors these new systems are using? A slow processor can lead to input lag, slow map rendering, and a frustrating experience, especially a few years down the road when the software gets more demanding. A system that's snappy today might be a brick in three years if the hardware isn't robust. To me, the upgradeability and processing power are more important than the screen size or the number of speakers.

Click to expand...

You just articulated why I'm leaning so heavily towards the NISMO. The "future-proof" aspect of Android Automotive OS is a massive selling point. The idea that my vehicle's tech can evolve and get better over time with OTA updates from Google is incredible. It means the system I have in year four could be significantly better than the one I bought, with new apps and features.

That makes the Sequoia's system, as nice as the big screen is, seem like a flip phone in a smartphone world. It's a finished product on day one. With the Armada, it feels like you're buying into a platform with potential for growth. That's a huge value-add that isn't on the window sticker.

TechieTom said:

Fascinating discussion. I look at this from a slightly different angle: the software ecosystem and hardware lifecycle.

A big screen is just a monitor. The real questions are about the operating system (OS) and the processor behind it.

- The Nissan/Infiniti systems with Google built-in are based on Android Automotive OS. This is great because it opens the door for third-party apps via the Google Play Store and should, in theory, receive regular over-the-air (OTA) updates directly from Google, not just Nissan. This is a huge advantage for long-term usability.

- Toyota's system is proprietary. It's clean and simple, which is good, but you're locked into their ecosystem. Their OTA updates have historically been for bug fixes, not major new features. You're basically getting a finished product that won't evolve much over time.

Does anyone know what processors these new systems are using? A slow processor can lead to input lag, slow map rendering, and a frustrating experience, especially a few years down the road when the software gets more demanding. A system that's snappy today might be a brick in three years if the hardware isn't robust. To me, the upgradeability and processing power are more important than the screen size or the number of speakers.

Click to expand...

This is a fantastic point. Your post has me seriously rethinking my priorities. I was leaning towards the Sequoia for its simplicity and reliability, but you're right—what happens in three or four years? I'd be very frustrated if my "simple" system felt ancient while a Nissan or Infiniti was getting regular, meaningful updates.

The idea of a slow, laggy system is a nightmare. I've seen forum posts from owners of other brands complaining about this exact thing a few years into ownership. This makes the underlying hardware and the promise of real OTA updates a much bigger factor for me. I need to do more research on how often Toyota actually pushes new features vs. just bug fixes. This might be a bigger long-term reliability issue than the mechanicals.

You all are acting as if Google integrating with a car's OS is some revolutionary concept. Welcome to five years ago in Germany.

BMW's iDrive and Audi's MMI systems have been operating on this level of technical proficiency for years. They are powered by robust processors, feature mature and stable operating systems (which are also often based on AOSP, by the way), and receive regular OTA updates.

The difference is in the execution and integration. In my Audi, the MMI system with its haptic feedback touchscreens feels like a piece of precision hardware. The virtual cockpit is seamlessly integrated with the main screen and the head-up display. It's not just "Google built-in"; it's a bespoke digital environment engineered specifically for the vehicle.

While it's nice that Nissan is finally catching up, you are essentially beta-testing their first serious attempt at this level of integration. The Germans, on the other hand, are on their fourth or fifth generation. There is a depth of refinement that can't be matched overnight.

Das Auto Fan said:

You all are acting as if Google integrating with a car's OS is some revolutionary concept. Welcome to five years ago in Germany.

BMW's iDrive and Audi's MMI systems have been operating on this level of technical proficiency for years. They are powered by robust processors, feature mature and stable operating systems (which are also often based on AOSP, by the way), and receive regular OTA updates.

The difference is in the execution and integration. In my Audi, the MMI system with its haptic feedback touchscreens feels like a piece of precision hardware. The virtual cockpit is seamlessly integrated with the main screen and the head-up display. It's not just "Google built-in"; it's a bespoke digital environment engineered specifically for the vehicle.

While it's nice that Nissan is finally catching up, you are essentially beta-testing their first serious attempt at this level of integration. The Germans, on the other hand, are on their fourth or fifth generation. There is a depth of refinement that can't be matched overnight.

Click to expand...

No one's denying the German systems are slick, but let's be honest about the ownership experience. I've had friends with BMWs and Audis, and the stories are always the same: a simple iDrive controller failure or an MMI screen glitch outside of warranty turns into a $2,000+ repair bill. They are notoriously complex and expensive to fix.

You call Nissan's integration of Google "beta-testing," but I call it smart. Why spend millions developing a proprietary navigation system when Google Maps is already superior and familiar to everyone? Why create a voice assistant when "Hey Google" is light-years ahead?

It's not about catching up; it's about leveraging the best available technology instead of stubbornly insisting on a less-intuitive, more expensive in-house solution. I'll take a system that's powered by a tech giant and has a massive developer community over a "bespoke" system that costs a fortune to maintain any day of the week.

I believe there's a middle ground here. @Das Auto Fan is correct that there's an undeniable polish and cohesiveness to the digital cockpit in a high-end German vehicle. It feels substantial. @ArmadaBound is also correct that they can be needlessly complex and costly.

This is where I feel the new Infiniti system truly excels. It offers the best of both worlds. Like the Germans, it provides a truly "bespoke" luxury environment. The dual screens, the quality of the displays, the integration with the head-up display, and the Klipsch Reference audio create a holistic, premium atmosphere that a standard Nissan or Toyota can't match.

However, by building it on the Android Automotive OS, it also benefits from the power and familiarity of Google's ecosystem. It's that final layer of intuitive, modern software on top of bespoke luxury hardware. It's the refinement of a German system without the frustrating proprietary quirks.

This is a great debate that highlights the core philosophies of these systems.

- German (Audi/BMW): They focus on vertical integration. The hardware and software are developed in a closed loop.
-- Pro: Highly optimized, seamless integration between components (gauges, HUD, screens). Feels very polished.
-- Con: It's a "walled garden." You're limited to their app ecosystem, and repairs on their specific hardware (like haptic touch controllers) are extremely expensive.

- Nissan/Infiniti (with Google): They're moving to a more open, platform-based approach.
-- Pro: Leverages the power of the Android Automotive OS, opening the door to a huge library of apps from the Play Store and consistent updates from Google. More future-proof.
-- Con: As Das Auto Fan noted, the integration might not be as deeply "bespoke" as a system designed entirely in-house. They're layering their UI on top of Google's foundation.

- Toyota: They're taking the conservative, reliable route.
-- Pro: Simple, fast, and does the basics very well. Likely to be the most stable and bug-free.
-- Con: Will feel dated the fastest. It will not evolve with new features in the same way the others will.

There's no single "best" system. It depends on what you value: the polished but costly ecosystem of the Germans, the future-proof potential of Google, or the steadfast reliability of Toyota.

Doesn't matter if it's made in Germany or Japan. All I'm hearing is a debate about which expensive computer will be the most frustrating and costly to fix when it inevitably starts glitching.