• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 7 replies
  • Subscribers 48 subscribers
  • Views 704 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Similar topics

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

DAC5675 vs DAC5675A

Philip Pratt
Intellectual 1960 points
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: DAC5675, DAC5675A, DAC5672, DAC5672A

Hello TI,

The 1-ch, 14-bit, 400MSPS DAC5675 webpage says its NRND (Not Recommended for New Designs) and points to DAC5675A as a replacement.

What are the differences between the two?  Is the DAC5675A better? 

Why did TI create the 'A' version?

Are they drop-in pin compatible? Can I order the DAC5675A if I've been using the DAC5675 and drop it in without any concerns?

Seeding a question to the forum,

:)

Philip Pratt

  • 0
    TI__Genius 17290 points

    Philip,

    The DAC5675A was created after an internal bug was found in the DAC5675 that could cause the part to enter an unknown state that it could not recover from (unless power was toggled). The state could be entered when the clock was starting and stopping often and it was found to be related to the DLL. We decided to remove the DLL from the part since it was not necessary for correct operation. The resulting performance of the DAC5675A is the same as the DAC5675, however the 'A' version has a little bit lower power due to the exclusion of the DLL.

    The DAC5675 and DAC5675A are pin for pin compatible. The only difference is that pin 38 (DLLOFF for the DAC5675) has become NC. On the DAC5675A, this pin is not internally connected and thus it can be tied high or low.

    The DAC5675A does have a little higher DAC latency at 3 clocks, versus 1 clock for the DAC5675.

    Regards,
    Matt Guibord

  • 0 in reply to Matt Guibord
    Mastermind 8430 points
    Hi Matt-san,

    Let me confirm the situation of DAC5675.
    I checked TI web site and I found that DAC5675 is still "Active", not "NRND".
    Is this correct?
    If the customer would like to use DAC5675, should I recommend DAC5675A to the customer?

    Thank you in advance.
  • 0 in reply to Takumi Suzuki1
    Mastermind 8430 points
    Hi Matt-san,

    Sorry let me again one more question.
    About DAC5672 and DAC5672A, the situation is the same as DAC5675 and DAC5675A, right?

    Takumi
  • 0 in reply to Takumi Suzuki1
    TI__Genius 12965 points
    Hi Takumi,

    I just checked and the DAC5675 is listed as NRND.
    www.ti.com/.../dac5675

    The DAC5672 and DAC5672A were a different issue. The DAC5672 was found to have some possible issue if the voltage difference between AVDD and DVDD exceeded +/-0.5V. This could potentially cause issues if the power-on sequence did not meet these requirements over process and temp.

    The DAC5672A versions had a slight fix to make it possible to sustain a much larger voltage difference between AVDD and DVDD to simplify power on sequence requirements.

    Ken.
  • 0 in reply to Ken C
    Mastermind 8430 points

    Hi Ken-san,

    I also just checked the web site...it's strange...but I understood.

    Thank you for your confirmation.

     

    About the difference between DAC5672 and DAC5672A, sorry, I do not understand well.

    My understanding is,

     As the issue of DAC5672 is "potential" "possibility" problem, not identified as "bug" to discontinued.

    Could you tell me the defference points between both devices on the datasheet??

    As a result, should we recommend DAC5672A to customers rather than DAC5672?

     

    Best Regards,

     

  • 0 in reply to Takumi Suzuki1
    TI__Genius 12965 points
    Hi Takumi,

    Please recommend using the DAC5672A - it has same performance, but does not have as strict power sequence requirements. The AVDD and DVDD can come up independently.

    The AVDD-DVDD maximum voltage difference requirement on DAC5672 is +/-0.5V (AVDD and DVDD must come on at approximately the same time) , while on DAC5672A it is +/-4V (AVDD and DVDD can be independent).

    Ken.
  • 0 in reply to Ken C
    Mastermind 8430 points
    Hi ken-san,

    Thank you very much for your prompt reply.
    I could understand well!
    I will recommend DAC5672A to customers.

    Best Regards,