4 ms·

If it is as good as the article claims, I would say more like “instantly”. Bringing the resonator on die eliminates the crystal from the BOM, one of the pricie

If it is as good as the article claims, I would say more like “instantly”. Bringing the resonator on die eliminates the crystal from the BOM, one of the pricier passive components. Also probably two capacitors are now gone, again for xtal circuits you need better caps, cheapies are not good for oscillator circuits. Plus the PCB area for the oscillator is eliminated, and that is an area of PCB that requires careful layout to meet the constraints on paracitic capacitance, etc.

baybal2 8y ago
Process people will take their sweet time to turn this into a marketable fab product. I'd say that it can come to market quicker as a packaging house product: they grow resonator dies with BAW separately, dice them, and put into existing RF SoC packages.
janekm 8y ago
Of course currently only TI can make these (though no doubt everyone else is going to make a real effort to replicate). The chip in question is rather pricey though, $11.44 in thousand quantities vs. $3.54 for the very similar NRF52840 + about $1 for the crystal and other components needed.
- ams6110 8y ago
  Or TI will license this to others.
- teraflop 8y ago
  You're looking at the price of their 400Gbps network synchronizer chip. The other chip they mentioned with this technology, the wireless microcontroller, is only $3.55.
TrueDuality 8y ago
The increase in power draw is significant for a lot of applications which will make these unfeasible. That being said there are a lot more applications that could fit that within their power budget. I suspect in the cases where the power isn't an issue it will come down to the designers choosing between the cost and space trade off where a crystal is necessary (it isn't always).