• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 14 replies
  • Answers 2 answers
  • Subscribers 47 subscribers
  • Views 1081 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

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.

TI OPA solution to replace NJU7076/NJU7077/NJU7078

Sean Liao (Yu-Sheng)
Intellectual 1950 points
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: OPA376, TLV376

Hi sirs, 

Could you please kindly provide TI solution to replace NJR NJU7076/NJU7077/NJU7078?

P-P compatible would be better. Thanks a lot!

https://www.mouser.tw/datasheet/2/294/NJU7076_NJU7077_NJU7078_E-779931.pdf

  • 0
    Guru 48395 points

    Well the parametric cross reference suggests the OPA376 family, there are likely slower parts in the TLV line that would work but I can't get those to show up here. I was trying to limit to 5.5V max Vcc, but could not in this tool - I seems to always deliver kind of much higher supply range options which probably not too interesting for a 5V CMOS crosses. 

  • Former Member
    0 Former Member

    Hello Sean,

    OPA376 would work, as Michael has suggested.  However, a more cost competitive option would be the TLV376. It has much better bandwidth and slew rate than the NJR part.  The maximum offset is also lower along with the voltage noise.  It's available in the 5-pin SOT-23 package with the same pinout as the NJR part.  The dimensions of the two parts look the same, with the exception that the NJR part claims to be 0.05mm shorter in length.  That seems to be within the margin of error given by the datasheet.  So, I'm not sure that such a small difference is of any importance.

    I think this is Pin-to-Pin compatible.  But, it would be a good idea to go through the pinout and part drawings with the customer to convince them.

    If you would like a more in-depth comparison, please reach out to me via email and I can provide that.

    Regards,

    Daniel

  • 0 in reply to Former Member
    Guru 48395 points

    Yea, that sort of spec downgrade version, the TLV376 would be better, I did put that in the cross reference tool and the reason it was not showing up is it has not been loaded in apparently - I suspect this tool is not being updated anymore, I wonder what the new BOM cross tool would return for this? 

  • Former Member
    0 Former Member in reply to Michael Steffes

    Hi Michael,

    I'm not able to find the TLV376 using the tool either...strange.  I'll dig into it internally and find out what's going on.

    Thanks for letting me know.

    Daniel

  • Former Member
    0 Former Member in reply to Michael Steffes

    Michael,

    Looks like this part was missed when transferring information to the backend for the tool.  I've been told this will be corrected.

    There's also a new tool available for comparing TI parts with competitor parts called the BOM Cross Tool.  You may try this instead, although it's rather new and still being improved.

    Regards,

    Daniel

  • 0 in reply to Former Member
    Guru 48395 points

    Not ready for prime time is more like it - if I put the NJR part in, nothing comes back - 

    If I put the OPA376 in, it only shows me the OPA376, the older tool was handy to find close TI parts as well, 



    I think that BOM tool is using a purchased 3rd party database. The older TI tool was a very carefully built, internally consistent, parametric database. Having done more than 150 datasheets, and analyzed 1000' more, there is plenty of latitude for some numbers - for instance, what is output current - often, the biggest number the marketer thinks he can get away with - that sort of GIGO operation is feeding into the BOM tool I suspect. 

  • Former Member
    0 Former Member in reply to Michael Steffes

    Hi Michael,

    I understand your frustration.  The issue of "latitude of numbers" is definitely something that I'm familiar with.

    I wanted to let you know that I've gone ahead and forwarded this case so it will be seen by some of the individuals that are working to build this tool.  Since the thread is now veering away from the original question and toward a discussion of the tools, I'm going to go ahead and close the thread internally.  But, I appreciate your feedback on the matter.

    Regards,

    Daniel

  • 0 in reply to Former Member
    Guru 48395 points

    Thanks Daniel, 

    Not really my frustration, I have a very pristine internally consistent database I use but it only goes down to the 20Mhz kind of region and up from there, So the quick way to check is that older crossreference tool on the TI website that also comes from a very good internally consistent parametric database - I would not turn that one off until you work through all the complaints heading your way for the new BOM tool (probably a decade min). 

  • 0 in reply to Michael Steffes
    TI__Intellectual 1950 points

    Hi Daniel and Michael, 

    So which part is better to replace NJR?

    OPA376 or TLV376? Thanks!

    BR, 

    Sean Liao

  • Former Member
    0 Former Member in reply to Sean Liao (Yu-Sheng)

    Hello Sean,

    Both parts are good options.  The difference is primarily cost.

    Based off the online prices, I think the TLV376 will be closer in price to the NJR part.

    Regards,

    Daniel

  • 0 in reply to Former Member
    TI__Intellectual 1950 points

    Hi Michael and Daniel, 

    Please kindly provide comparison table if possible, we would like to win not only by cost.

    Thanks a lot!

    BR, 

    Sean Liao

  • Former Member
    0 Former Member in reply to Sean Liao (Yu-Sheng)

    Hello Sean,

    Please see the image below.


    Regards,

    Daniel

  • 0 in reply to Former Member
    TI__Intellectual 1950 points

    Hi Daniel, 

    Is OPA376 and TLV376 same die and p-p?

    What is the difference between them to cause the different price. thanks!

  • Former Member
    0 Former Member in reply to Sean Liao (Yu-Sheng)

    Hi Sean,

    The primary difference between the parts is that the OPA device is tested more extensively so the customer will get a better performance guarantee as listed in the datasheet.

    The two parts are P2P.  As for what is going on inside the parts, we prefer not to go into those details.  I hope you will understand.

    Regards,

    Daniel