CDCLVC1108: Differences between 4/8-Ch versions & P2P

Darren (FAE)

Part Number: CDCLVC1108

I have a customer looking into a minor change, and are considering moving from the 4-Ch (CDCLVC 1104) to the 8-Ch (CDCLVC 1108).

I didn't see any Electrical Characteristics variations between devices in the DS, so is it safe to assume 4-Ch and 8-Ch are electrically equivalent (in their max/min ratings as well), the only difference being the package and number of pins/supported channels?

Are they P2P replacements for the following? Any key electrical characteristics concerns...?

- IDT(now Renesas): 5PB1108PGG
BOMCROSS shows they are "P" - not P2P, but looking at the datasheet they are both TSSOP packages w/ 16-pins, and look like the pin-out is the same.

- ONSEMI: NB3V1108C
BOMCROSS says we don't have an option, but it looks like 16-pin TSSOP package with same pin-out.

Can you help me check the electrical characteristics for key concerns? They look P2P to me...

Thanks,

Darren

over 4 years ago

0 Kia Rahbar over 4 years ago

TI__Expert 8585 points

Hello Darren,

All the electrical characteristics shall remain the same whether you are using the 4-CH or 8-CH (including the max/min ratings).

The CDCLVC1108 is NOT a good P2P replacement for the 5PB1108PGG. Although the CDCLVC1108 has the same pin out as the 5PB1108, they differ in electrical specifications. In particular, 1.8 VDD support will not be suitable for 1.8 VDD applications.

The CDCLVC1108 is a valid replacement for the NB3V1108C. All the electrical characteristics are the same between the two parts.

Regards,

Kia Rahbar

0 Darren (FAE) over 4 years ago in reply to Kia Rahbar

TI__Expert 5483 points

Hi Kia,

Thanks for the reply. Your reply helped me get started, thanks.

I don't know if I was looking at the right Datasheets (only found some DS available via octopart website), but it looks like most of the electrical specifications (when looking at 3.3V operation) are very similar. Actually, it looks like the NB3V1108C has tried to copy the best of both IDT and our devices...anyway, it looks like both devices support 1.8V, while our CDCLVC1108 only supports 2.5V and 3.3V...but if the application was P2P for 2.5V or 3.3V, then the specs look pretty similar. Would you agree?

The NB3V1108C Idd seems really low...is there a concern to look for in the DS as to why this is listed so low?

Regards,
Darren

項目	CDCLVC1108	5PB1108PGG	NB3V1108C
Vdd	~~1.8V (~~サポートなし)~~~~ 2.5V (2.3V ~ 2.7V) 3.3V (3.0V ~ 3.6V)	1.8V (1.71V ~ 1.89V) 2.5V (2.375V ~ 2.625V) 3.3V (3.135V ~ 3.465V)	1.8V (1.71V ~ 1.89V) 2.5V (2.3V ~ 2.7V) 3.3V (3.0V ~ 3.6V)
Idd MAX (3.3V)	10mA	38mA	0.2mA…?
VIH (CLKIN – 3.3V) VIL (CLKIN – 3.3V)	Vdd/2 + 600mV Vdd/2 - 600mV	0.7 x Vdd 0.3 x Vdd	Vdd/2 + 600mV Vdd/2 - 600mV
VIH (1G – 3.3V) VIL (1G – 3.3V)	Vdd/2 + 600mV Vdd/2 - 600mV	>2.0V / <0.8V	Vdd/2 + 600mV Vdd/2 - 600mV
クロック周波数	250MHz	200MHz	250MHz
遅延	2.0ns	2.5ns	2.0ns
ジッター	100fs (計算上)	50fs	100fs
Rise/Fall時間	0.8ns (Cl = …?)	0.75ns (Cl = 2pF) 1.0ns (Cl = 5pF)	0.8ns (Cl = …?)

0 Kia Rahbar over 4 years ago in reply to Darren (FAE)

TI__Expert 8585 points

Hello Darren,

The values in your table are the correct values.

Yes, I would agree. If the application was P2P for 2.5V or 3.3V, then the specs for the CDCLV1108 and the NB3V1108C are exactly the same.

As for the Idd, the static current consumption should not affect the pin to pin compatibility.

Regards,

Kia Rahbar

Clock & timing

Clock & timing forum

CDCLVC1108: Differences between 4/8-Ch versions & P2P