When it comes to achieving cashless and touchless smart-parking operations, both LPR (License Plate Recognition) and RFID (Radio-Frequency Identification) technologies are viable options, but they differ markedly in how they operate, what they require, and where they perform best. The comparison chart below highlights the key differences across several aspects.
Comparison: LPR vs RFID for Parking
 |  | |
|---|---|---|
| Aspect | LPR (License Plate Recognition) | RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) |
| How It Works | Uses cameras and AI to read vehicle number plates | Uses RFID readers to detect RFID tags attached to vehicles |
| Identification Method | Optical recognition of plate characters | Radio signal detection of unique tag ID |
| Hardware Required | LPR cameras + server/software for image processing | RFID reader + RFID tag (sticker/card) on vehicle |
| Vehicle Tagging | No need to install anything on the vehicle | Requires RFID sticker/tag to be installed on vehicle |
| Weather/Lighting Sensitivity | Affected by glare, dirt on plates, poor lighting | Generally not affected by weather or lighting |
| Touchless Capability | Fully touchless | Fully touchless, once RFID tag is in place |
| Cashless Integration | Linked with vehicle plate to user account, exit TPK(TnG card, credit/debit card) or eWallet Direct for fully touchless | Linked with RFID tag ID to user account, or exit TPK (TnG card, credit/debit card) or eWallet Direct for fully touchless. |
| Accuracy | 90–99% (depending on lighting, plate condition, etc.) | Near 100% if line of sight is clear and tag is working |
| Read speed / throughput | 1–2 frames (≈ 100–200 ms); no need for vehicle tag | < 100 ms tag response; lane speed up to 40 km h⁻¹ |
| Installation & Maintenance | Cameras need to be positioned accurately and cleaned regularly | Requires tag issuance and reader maintenance |
| Cost | Maybe higher in upfront cost (depends on camera price, server, AI software) | Maybe lower cost per reader and antennas, but costly on long terms tag per vehicle. |
| Per-vehicle cost | Zero | Low but non-zero (tag cost + distribution) |
| Security Concerns | Plate cloning or spoofing | Tag cloning or unauthorized tag use (less common with encryption) |
| Next Activity Capability | Easy to key in by car owners, easy to capture by system without needing an approval, it is more welcome for digital transformation. | Tag serial number only can be read by RFID reader, or it might be encrypted for security purpose, hence it is difficulty to be implemented for the purpose of next activities. |
| Common Use Cases | Visitor parking, mall parking, access control without prior registration | Season pass holders, residential or corporate users with assigned tags |
Summary
RFID is widely used for residential and season-parking access, but it is seldom deployed for visitor parking because user acquisition remains the main hurdle. Although license-plate recognition (LPR) has its limitations, it can be applied universally to visitor parking. By comparison, Touch ’n Go’s MyRFID is currently the country’s largest RFID program, but it covers only about 4 million cars, roughly 22 % of Malaysia’s 18 million registered vehicles. Consequently, at toll plazas with multiple collection lanes, MyRFID is usually confined to a single lane. Therefore, any parking facility that wishes to use RFID for visitor parking must also provide alternative entry methods.
Although RFID currently seems more suitable for season parking and impractical for visitor parking because of user-acquisition challenges, the government long-terms intention to mandate the implementation of ePlates on all vehicles may one day overcome this hurdle and make RFID viable for visitor parking.
03-8070 9933 • Email • www.timeteccloud.com • Interest Form