EPC16QC100SS vs EPC16QC100II 비교
다음의 상세 나란히 비교: EPC16QC100SS 제조: Intel 및 EPC16QC100II 제조: Altera. 주요 사양, 전기적 파라미터, 패키징, 수명 주기 상태, 가격 및 재고를 비교하여 설계 요구 사항에 가장 적합한 부품을 결정하십시오.
사양 비교
| 파라미터 | EPC16QC100SS | EPC16QC100II |
|---|---|---|
| 브랜드 | Intel | Altera |
| 카테고리 | Memory ICs | Memory ICs |
| 수명 주기 상태 | 최종 구매 | NRND |
| 재고 상태 | In Stock | In Stock |
| 단가 (USD) | $13.20 | $10.75 |
| 메모리 유형 | In-System Programmable Configuration PROM | FPGA Configuration PROM (Flash-based) |
| 메모리 크기 | 16 Mb (16,777,216 bits) | — |
| Configuration Interface | Passive Serial / Passive Parallel Synchronous / Passive Parallel Asynchronous | — |
| Operating Modes | FPGA configuration storage, ISP via IEEE 1532 | — |
| Supply Voltage (VCC) | 3.3 V (SS suffix variant) | — |
| I/O Logic Level | 3.3V or 2.5V selectable via VCCSEL | — |
| 동작 온도 | 0C to +70C (Commercial) | -40C to +85C (Industrial) |
| 패키지 | 100-pin PQFP (Plastic Quad Flat Pack), 20x14 mm | 100-pin PQFP (Plastic Quad Flat Pack) |
| 실장 유형 | Surface Mount | — |
| Compatible FPGAs | Stratix, Stratix II, Cyclone, Cyclone II, APEX 20K, other Altera FPGAs requiring >8 Mbit configuration | — |
| Programmability | In-system programmable (IEEE 1532) | In-System Programmable via IEEE 1149.1 (JTAG) |
| MSL 레벨 | [DATA_NEEDED: MSL level] | 3 (per JEDEC J-STD-020) |
| RoHS 상태 | [DATA_NEEDED: RoHS status] | Compliant |
| Lead-Free | [DATA_NEEDED: lead-free status] | — |
| Manufacturer | Intel (formerly Altera) | — |
| 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) |
| 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) |
| Configuration Pins | — | DCLK, DATA[0..n], nCONFIG, nSTATUS, CONF_DONE, OE |
| Compression Support | — | Yes (reduces on-PROM footprint vs uncompressed bitstream) |