Part A
10M40DCF672C8G
Intel
- Lifecycle
- Active
- Stock
- 5081 Stückzahl
- Package
- BGA-672
- Series
- Embedded feFPGAs (Field Programmable Gate Array)
Replacement verdict
Compatible functional replacement candidate
The 10M40DCF672C8G and 10M40DCF484C8G are functionally compatible Intel MAX 10 FPGA devices sharing the same logic density, speed grade, and operating temperature range, but they differ in package type and pin count, requiring PCB footprint redesign for substitution.
Logic Density
High match
Speed Grade
High match
Operating Temperature
High match
Package Type
Not compatible
Parts at a glance
Part B
10M40DCF484C8G
Intel
- Lifecycle
- Active
- Stock
- 7882 Stückzahl
- Package
- BGA-484
- Series
- Embedded feFPGAs (Field Programmable Gate Array)
Key differences
Rows are prioritized by design impact. Highlighted values require attention during substitution.
Key electrical and mechanical differences between the two devices
| Parameter | 10M40DCF672C8G | 10M40DCF484C8G | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Package / Case | 672-FBGA (27x27) | 484-FBGA (23x23) | The physical footprint and ball count differ, so the two devices are not drop-in compatible on the same PCB. |
| Number of I/Os | 360 | 240 | Different available user I/O counts affect how many peripherals and interfaces can be connected. |
| Total RAM Bits | 1,290,240 | 1,290,240 | Embedded memory capacity is identical, so on-chip buffering and storage capability is the same. |
| Number of Logic Elements / Cells | 40,000 | 40,000 | Identical logic density means both devices can implement the same logic complexity. |
| Number of LABs / CLBs | 1,250 | 1,250 | Equal logic array block counts confirm the same internal FPGA fabric organization. |
| Operating Temperature | 0°C to 85°C (TJ) | 0°C to 85°C (TJ) | Both parts share the same commercial temperature grade, so thermal operating limits are equivalent. |
| Voltage - Supply | 1.15V to 1.25V | 1.15V to 1.25V | Identical core supply requirements allow the same power rail design for either device. |
| Mounting Type | Surface Mount | Surface Mount | Both are surface-mount devices, so the same assembly process can be used. |
| Speed Grade | 8 | 8 | Matching speed grades indicate comparable maximum operating frequency and timing performance. |
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 | 10M40DCF672C8G | 10M40DCF484C8G |
|---|---|---|
| Supplier | - | Intel |
| Series | MAX® 10 | MAX® 10 |
| Part Status | Active | Active |
| Number of LABs/CLBs | 2500 | 2500 |
| Number of Logic Elements/Cells | 40000 | 40000 |
| Total RAM Bits | 1290240 | 1290240 |
| Number of I/O | 500 | 360 |
| Voltage - Supply | 1.15V ~ 1.25V | 1.15V ~ 1.25V |
| Mounting Type | Surface Mount | Surface Mount |
| Operating Temperature | 0°C ~ 85°C (TJ) | 0°C ~ 85°C (TJ) |
Frequently asked questions
What are the 10M40DCF672C8G and 10M40DCF484C8G devices?
Both are Intel (formerly Altera) MAX 10 field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) from the 10M40D family, featuring 40,000 logic elements (LEs), non-volatile integrated flash configuration, and DSP blocks. The 10M40DCF672C8G uses a 672-pin FBGA package, while the 10M40DCF484C8G uses a 484-pin FBGA package. Both are specified with a C8 speed grade and commercial temperature range.
What is the primary difference between the 10M40DCF672C8G and 10M40DCF484C8G?
The primary difference is the package and its associated pin count and I/O resources. The 10M40DCF672C8G is housed in a 672-pin FineLine BGA (FBGA) package, whereas the 10M40DCF484C8G is housed in a 484-pin FBGA package. This results in different maximum user I/O counts and different PCB footprint requirements, while the core FPGA fabric (40,000 LEs) and speed grade (C8) remain the same.
Are the 10M40DCF672C8G and 10M40DCF484C8G pin-to-pin compatible?
No. The 10M40DCF672C8G has a 672-pin FBGA package and the 10M40DCF484C8G has a 484-pin FBGA package. They have different physical dimensions, ball counts, and ball maps, so they are not pin-to-pin compatible and cannot be interchanged on the same PCB footprint without a redesign.
Do both devices offer the same logic capacity and embedded resources?
Yes. Both the 10M40DCF672C8G and 10M40DCF484C8G are members of the MAX 10 10M40D device family and provide the same core resources: 40,000 logic elements (LEs), 1,350 Kbits of M9K embedded memory, 126 embedded 18x18 multipliers (DSP blocks), and integrated analog-to-digital converter (ADC) blocks. The difference lies in the package, which affects the number of available user I/O pins.
Can the 10M40DCF484C8G be used as a drop-in replacement for the 10M40DCF672C8G?
No. Because the two devices have different package sizes and pin counts (484-pin FBGA vs. 672-pin FBGA), they are not drop-in replacements. A board designed for the 672-pin package cannot accept the 484-pin package without a new PCB layout, and vice versa. Designers must also verify that the reduced I/O count of the 484-pin device meets the system requirements.
What configuration options do these MAX 10 devices support?
Both the 10M40DCF672C8G and 10M40DCF484C8G support dual configuration images, instant-on configuration from internal flash, and external configuration via JTAG or passive serial. They also support remote system upgrade and are available with commercial (C8) speed grade. Configuration details should be verified against the official Intel MAX 10 device datasheet.
Which package is better for space-constrained designs?
The 10M40DCF484C8G, with its 484-pin FBGA package, occupies less PCB area than the 10M40DCF672C8G (672-pin FBGA). For space-constrained designs, the 484-pin device is preferable, provided its lower maximum user I/O count is sufficient for the application. The 672-pin device offers more I/O and is suited for designs requiring higher pin counts.
Are the 10M40DCF672C8G and 10M40DCF484C8G RoHS compliant?
Intel MAX 10 devices, including the 10M40DCF672C8G and 10M40DCF484C8G, are offered in lead-free, RoHS-compliant packages. However, specific compliance status can vary by ordering code and date code. Designers should confirm RoHS and REACH status using the manufacturer's product material declaration or distributor documentation for the exact part number.