EPC8QC100C vs EPC4QC100N Vergleich
Detaillierter Direktvergleich von EPC8QC100C von Altera und EPC4QC100N von Intel. Vergleichen Sie die wichtigsten Spezifikationen, elektrischen Parameter, Gehäuse, Lebenszyklusstatus, Preise und Verfügbarkeit, um das beste Bauteil für Ihre Designanforderungen zu ermitteln.
Spezifikationsvergleich
| Parameter | EPC8QC100C | EPC4QC100N |
|---|---|---|
| Marke | Altera | Intel |
| Kategorie | Memory ICs | Memory ICs |
| Lebenszyklusstatus | Obsolete | NRND |
| Lagerstatus | In Stock | In Stock |
| Stückpreis (USD) | $9,95 | $8,10 |
| Speichertyp | Flash-based Configuration PROM | Flash (NOR, configuration PROM) |
| Speichergröße | 8 Mbit | 4 Mbit (4,194,304 bits) |
| Configuration Schemes | Passive Serial, Concurrent (up to 8 chains), Parallel | — |
| Target FPGA Compatibility | Altera APEX, Stratix, Cyclone, ACEX, Mercury, FLEX series | — |
| Gehäuse | 100-Pin PQFP (20x14 mm) | 100-pin PQFP (Plastic Quad Flat Pack) |
| Montageart | Surface Mount | Surface Mount |
| Operating Voltage | 3.3 V typical | — |
| Betriebstemperatur | -40C to +85C (industrial) | 0 C to 70 C (commercial) |
| Programming Interface | JTAG / Altera ByteBlaster / USB-Blaster | — |
| Configuration Interface | Serial (DCLK/DATA) or Parallel | Serial / Parallel / JTAG (IEEE 1149.1) |
| Max Configuration Clock | [DATA_NEEDED: max DCLK frequency] | — |
| Flash Erase/Program Cycles | [DATA_NEEDED: endurance cycles] | — |
| RoHS-Status | [DATA_NEEDED: RoHS compliance status] | — |
| MSL-Level | [DATA_NEEDED: MSL rating] | — |
| Lead-Free | [DATA_NEEDED: lead-free status] | — |
| Programmable Type | — | In System Programmable (ISP) |
| Maximum DCLK Frequency | — | 66.7 MHz |
| On-Chip Decompression | — | Yes |
| Supply Voltage (VCC) | — | 3.0 V to 3.6 V |
| Typical Supply Voltage | — | 3.3 V |
| Package Dimensions | — | 20 x 14 mm |
| Pin Pitch | — | 0.65 mm |
| Packaging | — | Tray |
| Lead Free / RoHS | — | Yes (per chipdig datasheet excerpt) |
| Family | — | EPC4 Enhanced Configuration Device |
| JTAG Support | — | Yes (IEEE 1149.1 boundary-scan) |