The innovations in agricultural equipments have always been an important stimulator to the development of agriculture. For several years, we were witnesses of an irremediable increase in the size of agricultural machines. If this First Way, encouraged by farm machinery industry, is synonymous of high outputs, a lot of disadvantages can nevertheless be identified in term of soil compaction, difficulty to control large width implements on irregular soils, or to integrate the traffic on rural roads... A Second Way has recently been proposed by several research laboratories (Europe, Japan), based on light weight robots for a small scale farming at the plant level. This approach is well suited for high added value product such as market garden produce or flower productions. However, for crops like cereals which represent the first productive sector in Europe, previous smart robot machines even in swarm working configuration, would certainly not be able to assume harvest operations in large production areas. Thereby, another scenario, called the Third Way, could consist to propose machines medium in size and power but always integrating a high degree of technologies. Medium power could mean the possibility for agricultural machines to easier benefit of future car component developments in term of transmission (engine-wheel pack) or energy motorization (electric fuel cell). For preservation of economic competitiveness, these machines could compensate the decreasing of the work width by an increase of the forward speed. A high degree of modularity could also authorize the cooperation of machines, with a leader machine always driven by an operator, and one or several other following. The paper underlines main advantages and limitations of each way and gives some cost comparison elements about the First and Third Ways.