7 Replies Latest reply on Sep 27, 2019 2:01 AM by DheerajP_41

    CYW20706 vs CYW20719 vs CYW20735

    DaEr_349131

      Purely from a part cost & power-consumption perspective. Is there a comparison of these three parts:

      - CYW20706

      - CYW20719

      - CYW20735

       

      For power, I'm mainly after

      - deepsleep (wake on button)

      - static/idle cpu+radio with wake on directed-advertise

      - BT Classic TX @ +4dBm

       

      thx David

        • 1. Re: CYW20706 vs CYW20719 vs CYW20735
          MichaelF_56

          Here's a good table to start with:

           

          • 2. Re: CYW20706 vs CYW20719 vs CYW20735
            DaEr_349131

            Thanks Michael, great table!

             

            The Power numbers differ quite a lot comparing 20706 vs 20719 (50mA vs 6mA),

            almost sounds like the lower number is BLE, not "BT Classic"!?

             

            We're looking at doing A2DP source streaming (TX), would you recommend the newer gen 20735 or 20819 in that case?

            • 3. Re: CYW20706 vs CYW20719 vs CYW20735
              DheerajP_41

              Hi David Eriksson,

               

              For BT audio projects we recommend 20706. Please go through the below post to know the supported feature for each chips.

              WICED Bluetooth Software Features

               

              Thanks,

              -Dheeraj

              1 of 1 people found this helpful
              • 4. Re: CYW20706 vs CYW20719 vs CYW20735
                DaEr_349131

                got it. can you shed some info on why? the newer IC's are better in many ways.

                 

                Please also comment on the power numbers question:

                • The Power numbers differ quite a lot comparing 20706 vs 20719 (50mA vs 6mA),
                • 5. Re: CYW20706 vs CYW20719 vs CYW20735
                  DheerajP_41

                  Sure. Cypress chips support BT and/or BLE and it is compliant to the SIG core specifications. But all Bluetooth profiles are not implemented on all the available Cypress bluetooth chips. If we implement bluetooth profiles and provide the library to the customer, then, they can create the profile environment and their end application by calling few APIs. Otherwise, customers will have to create the profiles and use it to make their end application which is tedious work.

                   

                  20706 supports most of the common and useful BT audio profiles and we suggest our customers to use it. But 20719 also supports few BT audio profiles but not all as 20706. Please compare it from the table in WICED Bluetooth Software Features and select the chips accordingly.

                  • 6. Re: CYW20706 vs CYW20719 vs CYW20735
                    DaEr_349131

                    Thanks, the table lists that A2DP source is supported on both 20706 and 20719

                     

                    Before we close this thread. Can you please explain the power-numbers

                    • 20706 vs 20719 (50mA vs 6mA)
                      • is this BT EDR at same bandwith and same dBm??
                    • 7. Re: CYW20706 vs CYW20719 vs CYW20735
                      DheerajP_41

                      Hi,

                       

                      It depends on the architecture of chip, RF and Electrical design and parameters, and power class of bluetooth, etc....

                      Compared to 20719, 20706 has different design and that you can see in the functional diagram in the spec.

                      20719 supports only power class_2 and it is optimized to work with lower power consumption. And also many other HW and SW optimizations are done in the new chips overtime. One important difference is that, Max. TX Power of 20719 is only 4dBm but for 20706 it's typical value is 12dBm. So obviously power consumption will also increase. 

                       

                      There is limitation to disclose the design and other optimizations done in the chips on public forum. But, I will try to touch with the specialized team of Cypress in the HW domain, and if I get any useful information for you, I will let you know.

                       

                      Thanks,

                      -Dheeraj

                      1 of 1 people found this helpful