• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 3 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 30 subscribers
  • Views 2424 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.

Original question:

AWR1642: Can't choose between AWR and IWR range

AWR1642: Can't choose between AWR and IWR range

John Just
Prodigy 50 points
Part Number: AWR1642
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: IWR1642

I see that this post e2e.ti.com/.../601728  is pretty old and both the AWR 1642 & IWR 1642 are the same price currently.  I had the impression that the IWR was more accurate especially in the <3m range, but perhaps i was mistaken.  Is the AWR board more robust to vibration and environmental conditions as well as having an additional CANbus port?  If so i can't see why the IWR is still offered??

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 21295 points
    Hello John,

    The 1ku online price for the AWR part is a little more than twice the IWR part.

    Regards,
    John
  • 0 in reply to JohnH
    Prodigy 50 points
    Wow ok -- i was looking at the EVMs which are both $300, but yeah, why are the chips 2x difference in cost? They are very similar - where is that extra cost going for the AWR? Also - the IWR is advertised for mm or sub-mm level accuracy, but the AWR on a cm-level accuracy basis....is that accurate?
  • 0 in reply to John Just
    TI__Mastermind 21295 points

    Hi John,

    The advantages of the AWR1642 device are listed in the original post you referenced.  I have reproduced them here for reference.

    1. AWR1xxx devices support a wider junction temperature range, -40C to 125C. IWR versions support -40C to 105C.

    2. AWR1642 devices are qualified for automotive applications as they are AECQ100 qualified and have functional safety ASIL-B capable variants. This is not the case for IWR1642.

    3. AWR1642 has 2 CAN interfaces, one of them being CAN-FD. IWR1642 only has one CAN interface (no CAN-FD).

    There is no difference in the RF performance between the IWR1642 and AWR1642.  Both are capable of the same accuracy given the same software and scene.  (There is a High Accuracy Range Measurement lab in the Industrial Toolbox on the TI Resource Explorer which should run on both devices.)

    Regards,

    John