Part A
ADS8365IPAGR
텍사스 인스트루먼트(주)
- Lifecycle
- Active
- Stock
- 1786 PCS
- Package
- TQFP-64
- Series
- 데이터 수집 - 아날로그 변환기(ADC)
Replacement verdict
Not a drop-in replacement
The ADS8365IPAGR and ADS8342IBPFBR are not drop-in replacements for each other. They differ in resolution, channel architecture, package footprint, and analog input configuration, so a direct board-level substitution is not possible without redesign.
Different resolution
Different channel architecture
Different package footprint
Different input configuration
Parts at a glance
Part B
ADS8342IBPFBR
텍사스 인스트루먼트(주)
- Lifecycle
- Active
- Stock
- 7772 PCS
- Package
- TQFP-48
- Series
- 데이터 수집 - 아날로그 변환기(ADC)
Key differences
Rows are prioritized by design impact. Highlighted values require attention during substitution.
Key electrical and mechanical differences between the two devices
| Parameter | ADS8365IPAGR | ADS8342IBPFBR | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Resolution (bits) | 16 | 16 | Both are 16-bit ADCs, so resolution is equivalent and not a differentiator for substitutability. |
| Number of input channels | 6 (3 differential) | 4 (2 differential) | Channel count determines how many signals can be sampled; the ADS8365 offers more channels, affecting system architecture. |
| Sampling rate (max) | 250 kSPS | 250 kSPS | Identical throughput means both can handle the same signal bandwidth requirements. |
| Interface type | Parallel | SPI / Serial | The digital interface must match the host controller; parallel vs serial is a major architectural difference affecting pin count and firmware. |
| Supply voltage (analog) | 5 V | 5 V | Matching analog supply simplifies power design and ensures comparable input range. |
| Package | TQFP-64 | TQFP-48 | Different package footprints require PCB redesign; they are not drop-in compatible. |
| Input type | Differential (pseudo-differential capable) | Differential | Input configuration affects signal conditioning and noise immunity; both support differential inputs but with different channel arrangements. |
| Operating temperature range | -40 to +85 °C | -40 to +85 °C | Identical industrial temperature range means both suit the same environmental conditions. |
Need help validating a replacement?
Send your BOM and application constraints for technical and sourcing review.
Full specification comparison
Use manufacturer datasheets as the final authority.
| Specification | ADS8365IPAGR | ADS8342IBPFBR |
|---|---|---|
| Supplier | - | Texas Instruments |
| Part Status | Active | Obsolete |
| Number of Bits | 16 | 16 |
| Sampling Rate(Per Second) | 250k | 250k |
| Number of Inputs | 6 | 4 |
| Input Type | Differential | Pseudo-Differential, Single Ended |
| Data Interface | Parallel | Parallel |
| Configuration | S/H-ADC | S/H-ADC |
| Ratio - S / H: ADC | 1:1 | 1:1 |
| Number of A/D Converters | 6 | 1 |
| Architecture | SAR | SAR |
| Reference Type | External, Internal | External |
| Voltage - Supply, Analog | 5V | ±5V |
| Voltage - Supply, Digital | 5V | ±5V |
| Features | Selectable Address, Simultaneous Sampling | Selectable Address |
| Operating Temperature | -40°C ~ 85°C | -40°C ~ 85°C |
Frequently asked questions
What are the key differences between the ADS8365IPAGR and ADS8342IBPFBR?
The ADS8365IPAGR is a 6-channel, 16-bit successive-approximation ADC with a maximum throughput of 250 kSPS, specified for operation from a single 5 V analog supply with a 2.7 V to 5.25 V digital supply, and offered in a TQFP-64 package. The ADS8342IBPFBR is a 4-channel, 16-bit SAR ADC with a maximum throughput of 250 kSPS, operating from a single 2.7 V to 5.25 V supply, and offered in a TQFP-48 package. The ADS8365 provides six input channels versus four on the ADS8342, and the two devices differ in package footprint and pin count.
Are the ADS8365IPAGR and ADS8342IBPFBR pin-to-pin compatible?
No. The ADS8365IPAGR is supplied in a 64-pin TQFP package, while the ADS8342IBPFBR is supplied in a 48-pin TQFP package. The differing pin counts and package body sizes mean the PCB land patterns and pin assignments are not interchangeable, so a direct drop-in substitution is not possible without a board redesign.
Do both converters offer the same number of analog input channels?
No. The ADS8365IPAGR provides six analog input channels, whereas the ADS8342IBPFBR provides four analog input channels. Designs requiring more than four single-ended or differential input channels should account for this difference when selecting between the two parts.
What are the maximum sampling rates of these two ADCs?
Both the ADS8365IPAGR and the ADS8342IBPFBR are specified with a maximum throughput of 250 kSPS. The sampling rate alone therefore does not distinguish the two devices; channel count, package, and supply requirements are the primary differentiators.
What are the supply voltage requirements for each device?
The ADS8365IPAGR operates from a 5 V analog supply together with a digital supply in the 2.7 V to 5.25 V range. The ADS8342IBPFBR operates from a single supply in the 2.7 V to 5.25 V range. Systems designed around a single low-voltage rail may favor the ADS8342, while the ADS8365 requires an additional 5 V analog rail.
What resolution do the ADS8365IPAGR and ADS8342IBPFBR provide?
Both devices are 16-bit successive-approximation analog-to-digital converters. Each provides 16-bit resolution output, so selection between them should be based on channel count, package, supply configuration, and interface requirements rather than resolution.
What digital interface do these converters use?
Both the ADS8365IPAGR and the ADS8342IBPFBR provide a serial digital interface for output data. Designers should consult the respective manufacturer datasheets to confirm the exact serial protocol timing, frame format, and any mode configuration options before finalizing the host interface.
Can the ADS8342IBPFBR be used as a replacement for the ADS8365IPAGR in an existing design?
Not as a direct drop-in replacement. Although both are 16-bit, 250 kSPS SAR converters, the ADS8342IBPFBR has four input channels instead of six and is housed in a 48-pin TQFP rather than a 64-pin TQFP. A substitution would require verifying channel count adequacy, redesigning the PCB footprint, and revalidating the supply and interface configuration against the target design.