I'm a hardware/embedded engineer with 10 years in. I've watched colleagues go each route. here is what I've actually observed, which may differ from what admissions websites say.
MS in engineering (ECE, ME, CS, etc.):
For technical IC tracks in hardware, robotics, embedded, and semiconductor roles, the MS is nearly mandatory in 2026 for competitive senior positions. Companies like Qualcomm, NVIDIA, Apple silicon, and aerospace primes filter heavily. If you want to stay technical and move to staff/principal level, the MS legitimizes depth in a way that years of experience alone struggles to match in hardware (unlike software where portfolio can substitute).
Compensation lift: in my field, MS vs. BS at the same YOE typically means a level difference (L4 vs L5 equivalent) at FAANG hardware teams. in dollar terms that was roughly 30-50k/year when I checked recently, depending on the company.
MBA:
For hardware engineers, the MBA is a genuine function-switch vehicle. colleague of mine went MS EE, then after 6 years in silicon design got an MBA at Wharton, came out into tech strategy at a big semiconductor company, now heads a business unit. the MBA closed the door on deep IC work but opened a much bigger door into P&L-responsible roles he couldn't have gotten any other way.
the wrong reason to get an MBA in engineering: because you're tired of being an IC but don't know what you want. it's expensive therapy with worse outcomes.
what I've seen go wrong: people who get MBAs from engineering and find themselves in between worlds. too technical for pure business roles, over-credentialed for IC, and the MBA doesn't automatically come with a map to the hybrid roles (product strategy, business development). MS grads who spend 2 years on a research-heavy academic track and are then surprised that industry wants ASIC tape-out experience, not conference papers.
pick the degree that has a specific job title and career trajectory attached. "I want to be more credentialed" is not a plan.