• State
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 2 replies
  • Subscribers 80 subscribers
  • Views 660 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.

difference between msp430f423 and msp430f423A

Christian Mercier
Prodigy 10 points
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: MSP430F423, MSP430F423A

We use several MSP430F423 on one of our product.

We don’t have any more of them in stock and the suppliers seem to have MSF430F423A in stock.

On TI web site, i see this :  SAME FUNCTIONALITY and PINOUT as the compared device but is NOT an exact equivalent

I would like to know (quickly) what are the difference to see if it can affect my code or design, but i cannot find any documents or tables about this on TI  web site. Maybe this document exist and i just dont find it.

So, what are the difference between an MSP430F423 and MSP430F423A ?

Regards

  • 0
    Guru 227245 points

    The only difference I see is that the A version doesn't have errata SD1 and SD2 (regarding SD16 performance).

    Another difference is that the A type has 1.8V to 3.6V supply range listed on the product page while the non-A has 2.7V to 3.6V.
    However, both datasheets state 2.7 to 3.6V supply range at the beginning while the frequency vs. supply voltage diagram shows 1.8V on both datasheets.

    I looked for a migration guide (as it is available for the 5438/5438A) but found none.

    I'd say this requiries an official answer from the Ti engineering dept.

  • 0
    TI__Expert 7605 points

    Hello jablonski,

    Basically the device was revised to address the SD16 errata JMG highlighted in his reply. The result of this is that all die levels had to be changed and per TI Quality policy, in almost all cases, the new die must be independently re-qualified in our production flow and released under a different part number, thus the "A" differentiator.

    Spec wise they are almost exact- LPM3 Icc at 85C is slightly higher on the "A" part. Correction of SD1 and SD2 errata is the other.

    So, while it absolutely was designed to be a replacement for the non-A cousin, they have IC designs that while very similar, do differ enough to warrant the note on the product page. I would expect that a given system will not be impacted by the substitution however TI must leave it up to the end customer and their individual release criteria to determine if an end-product requal is needed.

    I hope this sheds some light, my apologies for the confusion and slow response over the holidays,

    Regards, Zack

**Attention** This is a public forum