AnsweredAssumed Answered

Is the i.MX6ULL drop-in compatible with the i.MX6UL?

Question asked by Carlson on Oct 13, 2017
Latest reply on Oct 16, 2017 by Yuri Muhin

I looked through the datasheet of the i.MX6ULL, and at least the 14x14 package seems to have the same pinning as the i.MX6UL. Are these drop-in compatible? Oddly, I didn't see any documentation that explicitly mentioned this (strange, as this is really a nice feature to have — and the other i.MX6s brag about it :-) ).

 

I've been getting a custom i.MX6UL board up and running, and since I'm about to order a new revision, I'm wondering what changes I need to make if I want to switch over to the 900 MHz i.MX6ULL? I'm looking at the MCIMX6Y2DVM09AA, which is only $1 more than the 535 MHz MCIMX6Y0CVM05AA I'm using right now.

 

The big difference I see is the minimum VDD_SOC_IN voltage. Since power consumption isn't critical for my application, I'm currently using a discrete DC/DC converter to generate a 1.35V rail that's shared by VDD_SOC_IN and my DDR3L memory (I really appreciate the built-in LDOs on the i.MX6 — thanks for that!)

 

However, the ULL needs a minimum of 1.375V. If I bump my regulator from 1.35 to 1.4V, that should provide enough margin, while still operating my DDR3L within bounds. Cool?

 

Looking at the errata, it doesn't look like the ULL has the crystal oscillator bug that the UL has. Is this correct?

 

Anything else I should be thinking about?

Outcomes