Would the performance of the AD9364 or AD9365 be degraded if the 1.8V supply on the 64/65 were driven directly by a switcher such as the ADP5034? Do you recommend using an LDO for this application?
In EVB the VDD_Interface is coming from FMC connector(FPGA board).
In EVB there are not other parts of the system(clocking, Baseband,..) in one board, the current drawn will be less.
In actual system the switcher power supply may be shared with other chips and may cause issues. So better to use LDO when it is implemented in a system.
Customer can have a provision for both in initial board, after testing and verification customer can change their BOM accordingly.
Noise consideration for 1.3V is more critical compared to VDD_Interface but we recommended to use LDO.
What is the application?
Hi Sripad, thanks for this. The application is for an inexpensive software defined radio. That's all the definition we have right now. At this time, the customer is very careful about putting info on the public forum.
I missed this, but the customer noticed it. The VDD_INTERFACE node (1.2-2.5V supply pin on AD9364 and AD9365) is driven directly from an ADP2164 switcher on the AD9364 FMC board. Do we really recommend that customers use an LDO here event though we drive it with a switcher on the FMC eval board? Can you explain?
If you look closer at that page on the schematic, you will see that the VDD_INTERFACE node is driven by the ADP2164 switcher. The customer is very concerned, so we are trying to make sure we all agree on this.
Yes it is driven but if you see the E303 ferrite bead is DNI and VDD_Interface comes from FPGA.
Oh yes, now I see, thank you!
Retrieving data ...