Consider Waymo Better Technical Approach and Safety
Waymo uses a multi-sensor suite: 29 cameras, 5 LiDAR sensors, and 6 radars, providing a highly detailed, redundant, and robust perception of its environment. This redundancy allows Waymo to perform reliably even in challenging conditions like poor visibility or complex urban environments.
Tesla relies on cameras only: Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” (FSD) uses 8–9 cameras and neural networks, without LiDAR or radar in production vehicles. This vision-only approach is more vulnerable to issues like glare, darkness, or camera obstruction, and lacks the redundancy of multiple sensor types.
Autonomy Level Waymo operates at SAE Level 4 autonomy: Its robotaxis can drive without human intervention in mapped and geofenced areas, meaning no safety driver is needed in these zones.
Tesla’s FSD is Level 2: The system can control steering and speed but always requires a human driver to supervise and intervene when needed.
Real-World Performance Waymo’s safety record and autonomy are strong: In direct head-to-head tests, Waymo performed more reliably and safely. For example, in a recent San Francisco test, Tesla’s FSD made a significant error while Waymo completed the route without issue, “handing Waymo the clear win”.
Waymo has provided millions of driverless rides: Its vehicles have driven over 56 million miles without a human driver, and it currently provides over 250,000 rides per week in multiple cities. Tesla has not released comparable driverless statistics, as its system still requires human supervision.
Deployment and Business Model Waymo’s service is already fully driverless in several cities: Including San Francisco, Los Angeles, Phoenix, and Austin, with ongoing expansion.
Tesla’s robotaxi service is just launching: As of mid-2025, Tesla is beginning public robotaxi trials in Austin, but its system is not yet fully autonomous.
Summary Table: Key Differences Feature Waymo Tesla FSD Sensor Suite Cameras, LiDAR, radar Cameras only Autonomy Level Level 4 (driverless in zones) Level 2 (supervised only) Real-World Driverless Yes, millions of miles No, always needs supervision Geographic Coverage Multiple US cities, expanding Just launching public trials Safety/Redundancy High (multi-sensor) Lower (vision only)
Conclusion
Waymo is widely considered better than Tesla for autonomous driving in 2025 because it delivers higher autonomy (Level 4 vs. Level 2), greater safety through sensor redundancy, and a proven track record of millions of fully driverless miles in real-world city environments. Tesla’s approach is more scalable and cost-effective, but it has not yet matched Waymo’s level of autonomy or reliability.
Consider Waymo Better Technical Approach and Safety
Waymo uses a multi-sensor suite: 29 cameras, 5 LiDAR sensors, and 6 radars, providing a highly detailed, redundant, and robust perception of its environment. This redundancy allows Waymo to perform reliably even in challenging conditions like poor visibility or complex urban environments.
Tesla relies on cameras only: Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” (FSD) uses 8–9 cameras and neural networks, without LiDAR or radar in production vehicles. This vision-only approach is more vulnerable to issues like glare, darkness, or camera obstruction, and lacks the redundancy of multiple sensor types.
Autonomy Level Waymo operates at SAE Level 4 autonomy: Its robotaxis can drive without human intervention in mapped and geofenced areas, meaning no safety driver is needed in these zones.
Tesla’s FSD is Level 2: The system can control steering and speed but always requires a human driver to supervise and intervene when needed.
Real-World Performance Waymo’s safety record and autonomy are strong: In direct head-to-head tests, Waymo performed more reliably and safely. For example, in a recent San Francisco test, Tesla’s FSD made a significant error while Waymo completed the route without issue, “handing Waymo the clear win”.
Waymo has provided millions of driverless rides: Its vehicles have driven over 56 million miles without a human driver, and it currently provides over 250,000 rides per week in multiple cities. Tesla has not released comparable driverless statistics, as its system still requires human supervision.
Deployment and Business Model Waymo’s service is already fully driverless in several cities: Including San Francisco, Los Angeles, Phoenix, and Austin, with ongoing expansion.
Tesla’s robotaxi service is just launching: As of mid-2025, Tesla is beginning public robotaxi trials in Austin, but its system is not yet fully autonomous.
Summary Table: Key Differences Feature Waymo Tesla FSD Sensor Suite Cameras, LiDAR, radar Cameras only Autonomy Level Level 4 (driverless in zones) Level 2 (supervised only) Real-World Driverless Yes, millions of miles No, always needs supervision Geographic Coverage Multiple US cities, expanding Just launching public trials Safety/Redundancy High (multi-sensor) Lower (vision only)
Conclusion
Waymo is widely considered better than Tesla for autonomous driving in 2025 because it delivers higher autonomy (Level 4 vs. Level 2), greater safety through sensor redundancy, and a proven track record of millions of fully driverless miles in real-world city environments. Tesla’s approach is more scalable and cost-effective, but it has not yet matched Waymo’s level of autonomy or reliability.
尤其是交给像马斯克这种极擅长营销的人，如果真要实现真正的“完全自动驾驶”，那就必须以“万无一失”的标准为目标来设计和实施。特斯拉所坚持的纯视觉方案，即使在某些场景下超过了人类驾驶员的视觉能力，本质上也仍然是不够的，即便某一天纯视觉系统的整体事故率低于人类驾驶，也不意味着这个方案就可以被接受，这也无法掩盖一个现实：每一个失败的案例背后，都是一条真实的生命。技术统计上的“更安全”不能替代个体的生死体验。对于普通人来说，不是所有人都愿意拿自己的命去为这套系统积累失败样本。毕竟，对那些真正遭遇事故的人来说，再低的概率也等于百分之百。
照片放了不到一天就被撤了，但女孩还在ICU躺着。我在路上碰到那些打着右转往左拐的，高速上被别的车哗哗超的，基本都是老人开车。反过来，横冲直撞，stop前不停车的，多半又是teenager。更别提晚上高速上某些晃晃悠悠的大货车了。
自动驾驶是趋势，不是特斯拉，也会是别的车厂；不是美国的waymo, tesla，也会是中国的华为，地平线，只要整体事故率低于人类驾驶。
而不应该像特斯拉死咬住纯视觉，如果你是一个优秀驾驶员，你愿意成为事故的牺牲品吗？