• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 1 reply
  • Subscribers 21 subscribers
  • Views 389 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.

CDCLVP1204: 05318B (LVDS) -> CDCLVP1204 (LVPECL) ->PHY (LVDS)

[FAE] Andrew Wang
Genius 10685 points
Part Number: CDCLVP1204
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: CDCLVD1204, LMK1D1204

Hi Team,

Customer wants our double check for their clock design, 05318B (LVDS) -> CDCLVP1204 (LVPECL) ->PHY (LVDS). If it looks ok to do so?

The main reason to use CDCLVP1204 instead of CDCLVD1204 is because the Tf/Tr of CDCLVP1204 is faster, customer has strict timing requirement at the end receiver PHY.

In their original PCB design, the Tr/Tf testing is over the spec Tf/Tr = 800ps max at PHY, so customer wants to do min change and see if can overcome this problem, thanks!

Andrew

  • +1
    TI__Mastermind 33350 points

    Hi Andrew,

    If they're already planning to use a separate device it may be simpler to use LMK1D1204 instead of CDCLVP1204. 300ps max Tr/Tf and P2P with CDCLVD1204, and the whole signal chain stays LVDS so no additional level-shifting termination is required.

    I think the scheme shown with the CDCLVP1204 and appropriate termination would work, but it wouldn't be my first choice when LMK1D1204 is P2P with CDCLVD1204.

    Regards,

    Derek Payne