is there the same silicon chip used in different housings
Hi, if one can buy the same size in different housings, will the chip be the same for the housing with lowest and highest Pin Count? Would e.g. same silicon chip being housed in 484Pin BGA (i.e. h...
I wanted to check if you have any further questions or concerns. If not, I will go ahead and mark this issue as resolved.
Additionally, we would greatly appreciate it if you could take a moment to fill out our survey. Your feedback is valuable to us and helps us improve our support quality.
for sure this idea is very strange, as it requires a custom made PCB to interconnect the BGA Pins with the QFP pads on the existing hardware. Something you would not think of in "normal" designs But a redesign of the hardware for direct assembly of the BGA is no option, being high-effort, ... of a proven in use design.
The "normal an intended" way is using the vertical migration feature, supporting different logic sizes being placed on same PCB, depending on the application's need.
In this special case, the problem is a combination of obsolescence and need to support old hardware. The original used FLEX10K is a 10K100ARI, i.e., a RQFP240 pin device. Being obsolete for many years now, we are meanwhile also running out of stock at Brookers. The 10K100 has been offered in the 484BGA (10K100AFI). To keep credits from the many years proven in use design, we would also like to re-use the programming file as is.
If the chip "inside" in the different housings (RQFP and BGA) is the same silicon, with just more or less I/O cells being bonded to I/O pins (depending on the housing), the original programming file should configure the BGA packed chip as well, shouldn't it? (The silicon is not aware of the housing used...)
With the cross-reference between RQFP Pin to BGA Pin, the adapter board should be designed to connect the correct pins and thus, the BGA on the adapter should be identical to the original RQFP housed device w/o any change of the programming file imho...
To prove this idea, I created a reference using the BDSL files, using the Boundary Scan Cell information section.
RQFP Pin6 = BGA Pin C22
...
Changing the target device and updating the pin-assigments accordingly, the *.pof is different... Using a HexEditor to open the *.pof this is shown in the target device being part of the datastream, originally the ARI240, noe the AFI484. If this is not part of the "real" configuration data for the chip ("just" information showing up in the programmer window?), this mismatch when using the original *.pof with the BGA should not prevent configuration and with the correct PCB between the original HW and the BGA housing the "ARI240 targeting" POF should be fine, shouldn't it?
Many thanks taking time to support this strange issue
New Contributor
