EPC16UC88II vs EPC16QC100II مقایسه
مقایسه دقیق کنار به کنار EPC16UC88II توسط Intel و EPC16QC100II توسط Altera. مشخصات کلیدی، پارامترهای الکتریکی، بسته‌بندی، وضعیت چرخه عمر، قیمت‌گذاری و موجودی را مقایسه کنید تا بهترین قطعه را برای نیازهای طراحی خود تعیین کنید.
مقایسه مشخصات
| پارامتر | EPC16UC88II | EPC16QC100II |
|---|---|---|
| برند | Intel | Altera |
| دسته‌بندی | Memory ICs | Memory ICs |
| وضعیت چرخه عمر | NRND | NRND |
| نوع حافظه | FPGA Configuration PROM (non-volatile) | FPGA Configuration PROM (Flash-based) |
| Density | 16 Mb (2 Mbyte) | — |
| Core Supply Voltage (VCC) | 3.3 V | — |
| I/O Supply Voltage (VCCIO) | 1.8 V / 2.5 V / 3.3 V | — |
| دمای کاری | -40C to +85C (industrial) | -40C to +85C (Industrial) |
| بسته‌بندی | 88-ball UFBGA | 100-pin PQFP (Plastic Quad Flat Pack) |
| Configuration Interface | Passive Serial (PS), Fast Passive Parallel (FPP), Active Serial (AS) | — |
| Architecture | CMOS serial configuration memory | — |
| Error Detection | Frame-level CRC during FPGA load | — |
| Daisy-Chain Support | Yes (multi-FPGA boards) | — |
| In-System Programming | Yes (via JTAG or AS mode) | — |
| نوع نصب | Surface Mount | — |
| Lead-Free / RoHS | Compliant per Intel product page | — |
| سطح MSL | [DATA_NEEDED: MSL level] | 3 (per JEDEC J-STD-020) |
| Compatible FPGA Families | Cyclone, Stratix, APEX, ACEX, Mercury, Excalibur | — |
| Memory Density | — | 16 Mbit |
| Supported FPGA Families | — | APEX II, APEX 20K, Mercury, ACEX 1K, FLEX 10K, FLEX 8000, Cyclone |
| Configuration Mode | — | FPP / PSA (Fast Passive Parallel / Passive Serial Asynchronous) |
| Programmability | — | In-System Programmable via IEEE 1149.1 (JTAG) |
| Cascade Support | — | Yes (multi-PROM cascading supported) |
| Core Supply Voltage | — | 3.3 V |
| I/O Tolerance | — | 5 V tolerant configuration pins |
| Package Dimensions | — | 20 mm x 14 mm, 0.5 mm pitch |
| Lead Finish | — | Matte Tin (lead-free) |
| وضعیت RoHS | — | Compliant |
| Configuration Pins | — | DCLK, DATA[0..n], nCONFIG, nSTATUS, CONF_DONE, OE |
| Compression Support | — | Yes (reduces on-PROM footprint vs uncompressed bitstream) |