• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 2 replies
  • Answers 2 answers
  • Subscribers 33 subscribers
  • Views 90 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.

SN65C3222E: What device can replace SN65C3222E with?

Kazuya Nakai59
Guru 20470 points
Part Number: SN65C3222E
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TRSF3222E

Hello guys,

One of my customers uses SN65C3222EDBR for current mass production.
Recently TI informed that SN65C3222EDBR was going to be EOLed.
They need alternative device which has same package type and same pin assignment to continue the mass production.
At this moment, the following question. Could you please give me your answer?

Q. What TI device can replace SN65C3222EDBR with?

Your reply would be much appreciated.

Best regards,
Kazuya.

  • 0
    Guru 259890 points

    There is no replacement in the same (SSOP) package.

    The TSSOP package has the same pin pitch (0.65 mm); the only difference is the width (SSOP: 5.3 mm, TSSOP: 4.4 mm). It might be possible to use the same footprint for both. Possible TSSOP replacements would be SN65C3222E‍PWR or TRSF3222E‍IPWR.

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 45797 points

    Hi Kazuya,

    As Clemens mentioned we don't have an alt in the SSOP package -but we do in the TSSOP package. They are not exactly the same package - but with the same pin pitch, and number of pins in the same configuration. The TSSOP footprint can be completely embedded in the existing SSOP footprint - as while its possible for the TSSOP device to fit on teh SSOP land-pattern (if rec. version is used) there isn't a lot of margin - you can place the footprint of the TSSOP in the current SSOP footprint on your board - essentially just extending the pin pads on the SSOP footprint to give some more margin for the TSSOP - and the rest of the board can remain the same. Its very minor rework - and the rework is only necessary to mitigate risk.

    I'd suggest the TRSF3222E above the SN65C variant parts.

    Best,

    Parker Dodson