• State
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 3 replies
  • Subscribers 98 subscribers
  • Views 874 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.

Use TMX version or TMS version of C667x for development?

Allan Law
Intellectual 340 points

Hi,

My group is currently using  and testing TMX320C6672CYP version for the our board development.

I would like to ask if there is a detailed explaination of the difference between TMX and TMS versions of the device.
I understand that there are the silicon erratas for Rev 1.0 and Rev 2.0 but how about the TMX vs TMS?

Since the TMS Rev 2.0 silicon is out, should we be testing our boards with the newest silicon revision so that we will not have to carry out the PLL fix from the I2C EEPROM? I would like to find out the differences as we will be using the TMS Rev 2.0 silicon for production and I would like to minimize the effort spent on fixing any issues with the TMX silicon.

Regards,
Allan 

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 30825 points

    Allan,

    This is detailed in the Device Manual.

    Device development evolutionary flow:
    • TMX: Experimental device that is not necessarily representative of the final device's electrical specifications
    • TMP: Final silicon die that conforms to the device's electrical specifications but has not completed quality and
    reliability verification
    • TMS: Fully qualified production device

    If you're going to production with Rev 2.0.  I'd suggest using Rev 2.0 (TMX or TMS) for development and testing and skip Rev 1.0 and performing the PLL fix if you haven't already done this.  The reality is that the TMX from a design perspective would be the same as the TMS version but we haven't completed qualification and there may be some small tweaks required to ensure they can meet full life and electrical specifications, which is needed to get to qualification.  There may be some tweaks in production that are done to achieve this, but no changes in terms of errata items.  

    Best Regards,

    Chad

  • 0 in reply to Chad Courtney
    Intellectual 340 points

    Hi Chad,

    Thanks for your reply.

    I was hoping to have a complete description about the issues with the TMX experimental version, similar to that of the errata for the silicon revisions.

    Can I say that all the issues in the errata that applies for TMX experimental device refers to the Rev 1.0 Silicon?
    The only difference between the TMX and the TMS will be its electrical specifications and life cycle and not its functionality? For example, differences between Rev 1.0 and Rev 2.0?

    We currently mounted two sets of our experimental boards and the TMX320C6672 of one board that we used frequently for initial testing is unstable as it suddenly cannot be accessed through JTAG while the other 2nd identical board that has minimal usage is working fine. We only used the board for 2 weeks and this symptom showed up.

    We are hoping to properly understand the differences as we purchased several TMX320C6672CYP and it will go to waste if we used the newer die without understanding the differences.

    Regards,
    Allan 

  • 0 in reply to Allan Law
    TI__Mastermind 30825 points

    Allan,

    If it's TMX Rev 2.0, then the Errata for Rev 2.0 apply.  If it's TMX Rev 1.0 then Errata for 1.0 apply.  

    Basically we simply can't guaranty the reliability over a lifecycle on TMX silicon.  Enhancements to testing, timing requirements, etc may have been added such that we can guaranty the MTBF, FIT rates, speed grades, temp ranges, etc, but these are not Errata items.  If something was fixed on a PG of Si, it was fixed from day one (i.e. TMX, TMP and TMS versions would all have the same fixes for it's Revision.)

    Best Regards,

    Chad