Post History
Sorry, but I have to challenge your premises when you say that most numbers are "round numbers" and that could be a reason for choosing some value. You compare those values by the number of decima...
Answer
#5: Post edited
by
Lorenzo Donati
·
2023-08-17T20:41:44Z (8 months ago)
- Sorry, but I have to challenge your premises when you say that most numbers are "round numbers" and that could be a reason for choosing some value.
- You compare those values by the number of ***decimal* digits**, but that's the wrong comparison.
- You should compare the ***significant* digits**.
- In fact what is important in any nominal value is its tolerance (i.e. relative accuracy), not its absolute accuracy.
- That's why many standard values are
- also standard [preferred values](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_series_of_preferred_numbers). It's a matter of tolerance spread.
- Here is the first decade of the E24 series (with E12 series values in bold):
- | | | | | | | |
- |-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
- |**1.0**| 1.1 |**1.2**| 1.3 |**1.5**| 1.6 |**1.8**|
- | 2.0 |**2.2**| 2.4 |**2.7**| 3.0 |**3.3**| 3.6 |
- |**3.9**| 4.3 |**4.7**| 5.1 |**5.6**| 6.2 |**6.8**|
- | 7.5 |**8.2**| 9.1 |
- These are the same series from which standard values for component parameters are taken (for example, resistance values for resistors or Zener voltage values for Zener diodes).
- Note that this cover many (most?) common "standard" voltage values, like for example: 12V, 15V, 18V, 24V, 75V, 120V, 240V.
- The only notable outlier is 5.0V.
- So, to answer your question, although the historical truth about that choice is quite obscure, I wouldn't rule out that when they decided they needed a standard voltage around 3V they simply picked the nearest E12 series value.
- <hr>
- **EDIT** (To integrate some more information I found)
- I stumbled across this JEITA (Japan Electronics and Information Technology Industries Association) document:
- [3.3V±0.3V (Normal Range), and 2.7V to 3.6V (Wide Range)
- Power Supply Voltage and Interface Standard for
- Nonterminated Digital Integrated Circuit](https://home.jeita.or.jp/tsc/std-pdf/ED5001A.pdf)
- In which there is an explanatory section that reports some of the discussion history for the standardization (mentioning JEDEC). At page 5 it reads (emphasis mine):
- >A power supply voltage of digital circuits had been kept 5V,actually for a long time from 1980’s. But,
- in 1990’s, a requirement of low power supply voltage has become increasing to attain a low power
- consumption and a high noise immunity of electric equipments, in a main application of portable
- equipments (note PC, etc) which need a long battery operation and high performance equipments (WS,
- etc) which require a high speed.
- >
- >In 1990’s, also an age of deep sub-micron process technology (below 0.5μm process technology) has
- begun. Needs of low power supply voltage have become the most important issue to obtain a keeping
- of reliability and continuities of the trends of high density, high speed, together.
- According to above back ground, discussion for standard of low power supply voltage, firstly
- 3.3V,have begun in JEDEC, from early of 1990’s. 3.3V standard (JESD8-A) was enacted in
- June,1994, 2.5V standard (JESD8-5) was in October, 1995 and 1.8V standard (JESD8-7) was in
- February, 1997, respectively.
- >
- >**Especially, 3.3V JEDEC standard(JESD8-A) was required to maintain 5V TTL and 5V CMOS
- compatibility, because both 5V and 3.3V power supply voltages were used in a transition period from
- 5V to 3.3V when it was a first case of lower power supply voltage.** To obtain a 5V compatibility, this
- standard defined a specifications of LVTTL and LVCMOS.
- >
- ><br/>
- >
- >IC Low Voltage Operation Sub-committee began the discussion for standard of low power supply
- voltage since April, 1996 in EIAJ, according to JEDEC's activities of power supply discussion, in
- anticipation of a real popularization of 3.3V power supply voltage from the half of 1990’s and coming
- of next lower supply voltage than 3.3V.
- EIAJ standard of 3.3V power supply voltage was established in May, 1998. This standard
- corresponds to that of JEDEC about specifications, because it has been already known and used
- widely in the world. But, this standard is amended from that of JEDEC about notation and sentence
- for accomplishing the unify of them among three JEDEC standards (3.3V, 2.5V, 1.8V).
- <br/>
- So it seems that that value (the exact value probably chosen to be a preferred number) was chosen because the logic levels for digital CMOS IC chips were compatible with the existing CMOS and TTL 5V families.
- What does it exactly mean *compatible* in this context should be explained in that JESD8-A standard.
- I guess that it is something about input and output logic levels, but the diagrams in @Mu3 answer don't explain all the implications.
- <hr>
- **EDIT2** (found JEDEC standard)
- I've retrieved a copy of the JESD8C.01 standard, which supersedes the JESD8A (incorrectly mentioned as JESD8-A in the JEITA document cited above).
I got the JESDA8C.01 from the JEDEC website (requires free registration). Unfortunately JESD8A is no longer available and so we must assume that JESDA8C.01 contains essentially the same information.<small><i><b>NOTE</b>: I can't directly copy-paste part of the document because it's copyrighted and I'm not sure about the fair use policy. I've contacted JEDEC about that, but their answer is not due before at least 8 days, so I just summarize below what I found in that document.</i></small>- The standard is named:
**Interface Standard for Nominal- 3 V/3.3 V Supply Digital Integrated
- Circuits**
- which already says a lot. It's a standardization effort to ease the transition from 5V logic chips to lower voltage chips and it specifies the input/output voltage thresholds for the new "3.3V families".
- It defines three power supply ranges, named *narrow*, *normal* and *extended*, which correspond to *commercial*, *industrial* and *military* ranges often used by manufacturers. The main requirements are these:
| |Narrow |Normal |Extended|---------------|-----------------|---------------|-----------|Nominal voltage|3.3V |3.3V | 3.0V|V<sub>DD</sub> |3.15V–3.45V|3.0V–3.6V|2.7V–3.6Vwhere V<sub>DD</sub> is the actual positive supply power.- Then it goes on defining two compatibility classes: **LVTTL-compatible devices** and **LVCMOS-compatible devices**, which I'll call simply LVTTL devices and LVCMOS devices below.
- **NOTE**: all the requirements stated in the standard must be met by the devices **regardless of their range** (narrow, normal, extended) and over their entire V<sub>DD</sub> range.
- <br/>
- **LVTTL and LVCMOS *input* requirements**
<b><table><tr><th></th><th></th><th></th><tr><tr><td>V<sub>IH(min)</sub> = 2V</td><td>V<sub>IH(max)</sub> = V<sub>DD</sub> − 0.3V</td><td rowspan="2">V<sub>OUT</sub> ≥ V<sub>OH(min)</sub><br/><span style="font-weight:normal">or</span><br/>V<sub>OUT</sub> ≤ V<sub>OL(max)</sub></td></tr><tr><td>V<sub>IL(min)</sub> = -0.3V</td><td>V<sub>IL(max)</sub> = 0.8V</td><td></td></tr></table></b><br/>- The difference between LVTTL and LVCMOS is in their output requirements.
- **LVTTL *output* requirements**
<b>V<sub>OH(min)</sub> = 2.4V @ I<sub>OH</sub> = -2mA, V<sub>DD</sub> = V<sub>DD(min)</sub><br/>V<sub>OL(max)</sub> = 0.4V @ I<sub>OL</sub> = 2mA, V<sub>DD</sub> = V<sub>DD(min)</sub></b>**LVCMOS *output* requirements**<b>V<sub>OH(min)</sub> = V<sub>DD</sub> − 0.2V @ I<sub>OH</sub> = -100μA, V<sub>DD</sub> = V<sub>DD(min)</sub><br/>V<sub>OL(max)</sub> = 0.2V @ I<sub>OL</sub> = 100μA, V<sub>DD</sub> = V<sub>DD(min)</sub></b>
- Sorry, but I have to challenge your premises when you say that most numbers are "round numbers" and that could be a reason for choosing some value.
- You compare those values by the number of ***decimal* digits**, but that's the wrong comparison.
- You should compare the ***significant* digits**.
- In fact what is important in any nominal value is its tolerance (i.e. relative accuracy), not its absolute accuracy.
- That's why many standard values are
- also standard [preferred values](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_series_of_preferred_numbers). It's a matter of tolerance spread.
- Here is the first decade of the E24 series (with E12 series values in bold):
- | | | | | | | |
- |-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
- |**1.0**| 1.1 |**1.2**| 1.3 |**1.5**| 1.6 |**1.8**|
- | 2.0 |**2.2**| 2.4 |**2.7**| 3.0 |**3.3**| 3.6 |
- |**3.9**| 4.3 |**4.7**| 5.1 |**5.6**| 6.2 |**6.8**|
- | 7.5 |**8.2**| 9.1 |
- These are the same series from which standard values for component parameters are taken (for example, resistance values for resistors or Zener voltage values for Zener diodes).
- Note that this cover many (most?) common "standard" voltage values, like for example: 12V, 15V, 18V, 24V, 75V, 120V, 240V.
- The only notable outlier is 5.0V.
- So, to answer your question, although the historical truth about that choice is quite obscure, I wouldn't rule out that when they decided they needed a standard voltage around 3V they simply picked the nearest E12 series value.
- <hr>
- **EDIT** (To integrate some more information I found)
- I stumbled across this JEITA (Japan Electronics and Information Technology Industries Association) document:
- [3.3V±0.3V (Normal Range), and 2.7V to 3.6V (Wide Range)
- Power Supply Voltage and Interface Standard for
- Nonterminated Digital Integrated Circuit](https://home.jeita.or.jp/tsc/std-pdf/ED5001A.pdf)
- In which there is an explanatory section that reports some of the discussion history for the standardization (mentioning JEDEC). At page 5 it reads (emphasis mine):
- >A power supply voltage of digital circuits had been kept 5V,actually for a long time from 1980’s. But,
- in 1990’s, a requirement of low power supply voltage has become increasing to attain a low power
- consumption and a high noise immunity of electric equipments, in a main application of portable
- equipments (note PC, etc) which need a long battery operation and high performance equipments (WS,
- etc) which require a high speed.
- >
- >In 1990’s, also an age of deep sub-micron process technology (below 0.5μm process technology) has
- begun. Needs of low power supply voltage have become the most important issue to obtain a keeping
- of reliability and continuities of the trends of high density, high speed, together.
- According to above back ground, discussion for standard of low power supply voltage, firstly
- 3.3V,have begun in JEDEC, from early of 1990’s. 3.3V standard (JESD8-A) was enacted in
- June,1994, 2.5V standard (JESD8-5) was in October, 1995 and 1.8V standard (JESD8-7) was in
- February, 1997, respectively.
- >
- >**Especially, 3.3V JEDEC standard(JESD8-A) was required to maintain 5V TTL and 5V CMOS
- compatibility, because both 5V and 3.3V power supply voltages were used in a transition period from
- 5V to 3.3V when it was a first case of lower power supply voltage.** To obtain a 5V compatibility, this
- standard defined a specifications of LVTTL and LVCMOS.
- >
- ><br/>
- >
- >IC Low Voltage Operation Sub-committee began the discussion for standard of low power supply
- voltage since April, 1996 in EIAJ, according to JEDEC's activities of power supply discussion, in
- anticipation of a real popularization of 3.3V power supply voltage from the half of 1990’s and coming
- of next lower supply voltage than 3.3V.
- EIAJ standard of 3.3V power supply voltage was established in May, 1998. This standard
- corresponds to that of JEDEC about specifications, because it has been already known and used
- widely in the world. But, this standard is amended from that of JEDEC about notation and sentence
- for accomplishing the unify of them among three JEDEC standards (3.3V, 2.5V, 1.8V).
- <br/>
- So it seems that that value (the exact value probably chosen to be a preferred number) was chosen because the logic levels for digital CMOS IC chips were compatible with the existing CMOS and TTL 5V families.
- What does it exactly mean *compatible* in this context should be explained in that JESD8-A standard.
- I guess that it is something about input and output logic levels, but the diagrams in @Mu3 answer don't explain all the implications.
- <hr>
- **EDIT2** (found JEDEC standard)
- I've retrieved a copy of the JESD8C.01 standard, which supersedes the JESD8A (incorrectly mentioned as JESD8-A in the JEITA document cited above).
- I got the JESD8C.01 from the JEDEC website (requires free registration). Unfortunately JESD8A is no longer available and so we can't do anything but assume that JESD8C.01 contains essentially the same information.
- <sub><i>
- <b>NOTE</b>: I've asked JEDEC and got permission to quote excerpts of the aforementioned standard, provided I give attribution with a format they required (that's the reason for all the boilerplate attribution text below).
- </i></sub>
- The standard is named:
- [JESD8C.01 (**Interface Standard for Nominal
- 3 V/3.3 V Supply Digital Integrated
- Circuits**
- )](https://www.jedec.org/system/files/docs/JESD8C-01.pdf)[^1]
- <br>
- <sub><i><b>NOTE</b>: you need to register to JEDEC website before using that link to download the document.</i></sub>
- [^1]: JEDEC standards and publications are copyrighted by the JEDEC Solid State Technology Association. All rights reserved.
- which already says a lot. It's a standardization effort to ease the transition from 5V logic chips to lower voltage chips and it specifies the input/output voltage thresholds for the new "3.3V families".
- It defines three power supply ranges, named *narrow*, *normal* and *extended*, which correspond to *commercial*, *industrial* and *military* ranges often used by manufacturers. The main requirements are these:
- >
- >
- > *This table is reproduced, with permission, from JEDEC document JESD8C.01, table 1.*
- <br>
- Then it goes on defining two compatibility classes: **LVTTL-compatible devices** and **LVCMOS-compatible devices**, which I'll call simply LVTTL devices and LVCMOS devices below.
- **NOTE**: all the requirements stated in the standard must be met by the devices **regardless of their range** (narrow, normal, extended) and over their entire V<sub>DD</sub> range.
- <br/>
- **LVTTL and LVCMOS *input* requirements**
- >
- >
- > *This table is reproduced, with permission, from JEDEC document JESD8C.01, table 2.*
- <br>
- The difference between LVTTL and LVCMOS is in their output requirements.
- <br>
- **LVTTL *output* requirements**
- >
- >
- > *This table is reproduced, with permission, from JEDEC document JESD8C.01, table 3.*
- <br>
- **LVCMOS *output* requirements**
- >
- >
- > *This table is reproduced, with permission, from JEDEC document JESD8C.01, table 4.*
#4: Post edited
by
Lorenzo Donati
·
2023-08-04T12:33:58Z (9 months ago)
- Sorry, but I have to challenge your premises when you say that most numbers are "round numbers" and that could be a reason for choosing some value.
- You compare those values by the number of ***decimal* digits**, but that's the wrong comparison.
- You should compare the ***significant* digits**.
- In fact what is important in any nominal value is its tolerance (i.e. relative accuracy), not its absolute accuracy.
- That's why many standard values are
- also standard [preferred values](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_series_of_preferred_numbers). It's a matter of tolerance spread.
- Here is the first decade of the E24 series (with E12 series values in bold):
- | | | | | | | |
- |-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
- |**1.0**| 1.1 |**1.2**| 1.3 |**1.5**| 1.6 |**1.8**|
- | 2.0 |**2.2**| 2.4 |**2.7**| 3.0 |**3.3**| 3.6 |
- |**3.9**| 4.3 |**4.7**| 5.1 |**5.6**| 6.2 |**6.8**|
- | 7.5 |**8.2**| 9.1 |
- These are the same series from which standard values for component parameters are taken (for example, resistance values for resistors or Zener voltage values for Zener diodes).
- Note that this cover many (most?) common "standard" voltage values, like for example: 12V, 15V, 18V, 24V, 75V, 120V, 240V.
- The only notable outlier is 5.0V.
- So, to answer your question, although the historical truth about that choice is quite obscure, I wouldn't rule out that when they decided they needed a standard voltage around 3V they simply picked the nearest E12 series value.
- <hr>
- **EDIT** (To integrate some more information I found)
- I stumbled across this JEITA (Japan Electronics and Information Technology Industries Association) document:
- [3.3V±0.3V (Normal Range), and 2.7V to 3.6V (Wide Range)
- Power Supply Voltage and Interface Standard for
- Nonterminated Digital Integrated Circuit](https://home.jeita.or.jp/tsc/std-pdf/ED5001A.pdf)
- In which there is an explanatory section that reports some of the discussion history for the standardization (mentioning JEDEC). At page 5 it reads (emphasis mine):
- >A power supply voltage of digital circuits had been kept 5V,actually for a long time from 1980’s. But,
- in 1990’s, a requirement of low power supply voltage has become increasing to attain a low power
- consumption and a high noise immunity of electric equipments, in a main application of portable
- equipments (note PC, etc) which need a long battery operation and high performance equipments (WS,
- etc) which require a high speed.
- >
- >In 1990’s, also an age of deep sub-micron process technology (below 0.5μm process technology) has
- begun. Needs of low power supply voltage have become the most important issue to obtain a keeping
- of reliability and continuities of the trends of high density, high speed, together.
- According to above back ground, discussion for standard of low power supply voltage, firstly
- 3.3V,have begun in JEDEC, from early of 1990’s. 3.3V standard (JESD8-A) was enacted in
- June,1994, 2.5V standard (JESD8-5) was in October, 1995 and 1.8V standard (JESD8-7) was in
- February, 1997, respectively.
- >
- >**Especially, 3.3V JEDEC standard(JESD8-A) was required to maintain 5V TTL and 5V CMOS
- compatibility, because both 5V and 3.3V power supply voltages were used in a transition period from
- 5V to 3.3V when it was a first case of lower power supply voltage.** To obtain a 5V compatibility, this
- standard defined a specifications of LVTTL and LVCMOS.
- >
- ><br/>
- >
- >IC Low Voltage Operation Sub-committee began the discussion for standard of low power supply
- voltage since April, 1996 in EIAJ, according to JEDEC's activities of power supply discussion, in
- anticipation of a real popularization of 3.3V power supply voltage from the half of 1990’s and coming
- of next lower supply voltage than 3.3V.
- EIAJ standard of 3.3V power supply voltage was established in May, 1998. This standard
- corresponds to that of JEDEC about specifications, because it has been already known and used
- widely in the world. But, this standard is amended from that of JEDEC about notation and sentence
- for accomplishing the unify of them among three JEDEC standards (3.3V, 2.5V, 1.8V).
- <br/>
- So it seems that that value (the exact value probably chosen to be a preferred number) was chosen because the logic levels for digital CMOS IC chips were compatible with the existing CMOS and TTL 5V families.
- What does it exactly mean *compatible* in this context should be explained in that JESD8-A standard.
- I guess that it is something about input and output logic levels, but the diagrams in @Mu3 answer don't explain all the implications.
- Sorry, but I have to challenge your premises when you say that most numbers are "round numbers" and that could be a reason for choosing some value.
- You compare those values by the number of ***decimal* digits**, but that's the wrong comparison.
- You should compare the ***significant* digits**.
- In fact what is important in any nominal value is its tolerance (i.e. relative accuracy), not its absolute accuracy.
- That's why many standard values are
- also standard [preferred values](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_series_of_preferred_numbers). It's a matter of tolerance spread.
- Here is the first decade of the E24 series (with E12 series values in bold):
- | | | | | | | |
- |-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
- |**1.0**| 1.1 |**1.2**| 1.3 |**1.5**| 1.6 |**1.8**|
- | 2.0 |**2.2**| 2.4 |**2.7**| 3.0 |**3.3**| 3.6 |
- |**3.9**| 4.3 |**4.7**| 5.1 |**5.6**| 6.2 |**6.8**|
- | 7.5 |**8.2**| 9.1 |
- These are the same series from which standard values for component parameters are taken (for example, resistance values for resistors or Zener voltage values for Zener diodes).
- Note that this cover many (most?) common "standard" voltage values, like for example: 12V, 15V, 18V, 24V, 75V, 120V, 240V.
- The only notable outlier is 5.0V.
- So, to answer your question, although the historical truth about that choice is quite obscure, I wouldn't rule out that when they decided they needed a standard voltage around 3V they simply picked the nearest E12 series value.
- <hr>
- **EDIT** (To integrate some more information I found)
- I stumbled across this JEITA (Japan Electronics and Information Technology Industries Association) document:
- [3.3V±0.3V (Normal Range), and 2.7V to 3.6V (Wide Range)
- Power Supply Voltage and Interface Standard for
- Nonterminated Digital Integrated Circuit](https://home.jeita.or.jp/tsc/std-pdf/ED5001A.pdf)
- In which there is an explanatory section that reports some of the discussion history for the standardization (mentioning JEDEC). At page 5 it reads (emphasis mine):
- >A power supply voltage of digital circuits had been kept 5V,actually for a long time from 1980’s. But,
- in 1990’s, a requirement of low power supply voltage has become increasing to attain a low power
- consumption and a high noise immunity of electric equipments, in a main application of portable
- equipments (note PC, etc) which need a long battery operation and high performance equipments (WS,
- etc) which require a high speed.
- >
- >In 1990’s, also an age of deep sub-micron process technology (below 0.5μm process technology) has
- begun. Needs of low power supply voltage have become the most important issue to obtain a keeping
- of reliability and continuities of the trends of high density, high speed, together.
- According to above back ground, discussion for standard of low power supply voltage, firstly
- 3.3V,have begun in JEDEC, from early of 1990’s. 3.3V standard (JESD8-A) was enacted in
- June,1994, 2.5V standard (JESD8-5) was in October, 1995 and 1.8V standard (JESD8-7) was in
- February, 1997, respectively.
- >
- >**Especially, 3.3V JEDEC standard(JESD8-A) was required to maintain 5V TTL and 5V CMOS
- compatibility, because both 5V and 3.3V power supply voltages were used in a transition period from
- 5V to 3.3V when it was a first case of lower power supply voltage.** To obtain a 5V compatibility, this
- standard defined a specifications of LVTTL and LVCMOS.
- >
- ><br/>
- >
- >IC Low Voltage Operation Sub-committee began the discussion for standard of low power supply
- voltage since April, 1996 in EIAJ, according to JEDEC's activities of power supply discussion, in
- anticipation of a real popularization of 3.3V power supply voltage from the half of 1990’s and coming
- of next lower supply voltage than 3.3V.
- EIAJ standard of 3.3V power supply voltage was established in May, 1998. This standard
- corresponds to that of JEDEC about specifications, because it has been already known and used
- widely in the world. But, this standard is amended from that of JEDEC about notation and sentence
- for accomplishing the unify of them among three JEDEC standards (3.3V, 2.5V, 1.8V).
- <br/>
- So it seems that that value (the exact value probably chosen to be a preferred number) was chosen because the logic levels for digital CMOS IC chips were compatible with the existing CMOS and TTL 5V families.
- What does it exactly mean *compatible* in this context should be explained in that JESD8-A standard.
- I guess that it is something about input and output logic levels, but the diagrams in @Mu3 answer don't explain all the implications.
- <hr>
- **EDIT2** (found JEDEC standard)
- I've retrieved a copy of the JESD8C.01 standard, which supersedes the JESD8A (incorrectly mentioned as JESD8-A in the JEITA document cited above).
- I got the JESDA8C.01 from the JEDEC website (requires free registration). Unfortunately JESD8A is no longer available and so we must assume that JESDA8C.01 contains essentially the same information.
- <small><i>
- <b>NOTE</b>: I can't directly copy-paste part of the document because it's copyrighted and I'm not sure about the fair use policy. I've contacted JEDEC about that, but their answer is not due before at least 8 days, so I just summarize below what I found in that document.
- </i></small>
- The standard is named:
- **Interface Standard for Nominal
- 3 V/3.3 V Supply Digital Integrated
- Circuits**
- which already says a lot. It's a standardization effort to ease the transition from 5V logic chips to lower voltage chips and it specifies the input/output voltage thresholds for the new "3.3V families".
- It defines three power supply ranges, named *narrow*, *normal* and *extended*, which correspond to *commercial*, *industrial* and *military* ranges often used by manufacturers. The main requirements are these:
- | |Narrow |Normal |Extended
- |---------------|-----------------|---------------|-----------
- |Nominal voltage|3.3V |3.3V | 3.0V
- |V<sub>DD</sub> |3.15V–3.45V|3.0V–3.6V|2.7V–3.6V
- where V<sub>DD</sub> is the actual positive supply power.
- Then it goes on defining two compatibility classes: **LVTTL-compatible devices** and **LVCMOS-compatible devices**, which I'll call simply LVTTL devices and LVCMOS devices below.
- **NOTE**: all the requirements stated in the standard must be met by the devices **regardless of their range** (narrow, normal, extended) and over their entire V<sub>DD</sub> range.
- <br/>
- **LVTTL and LVCMOS *input* requirements**
- <b>
- <table>
- <tr>
- <th></th><th></th><th></th>
- <tr>
- <tr>
- <td>
- V<sub>IH(min)</sub> = 2V
- </td>
- <td>
- V<sub>IH(max)</sub> = V<sub>DD</sub> − 0.3V
- </td>
- <td rowspan="2">
- V<sub>OUT</sub> ≥ V<sub>OH(min)</sub>
- <br/>
- <span style="font-weight:normal">or</span>
- <br/>
- V<sub>OUT</sub> ≤ V<sub>OL(max)</sub>
- </td>
- </tr>
- <tr>
- <td>
- V<sub>IL(min)</sub> = -0.3V
- </td>
- <td>
- V<sub>IL(max)</sub> = 0.8V
- </td>
- <td></td>
- </tr>
- </table>
- </b>
- <br/>
- The difference between LVTTL and LVCMOS is in their output requirements.
- **LVTTL *output* requirements**
- <b>
- V<sub>OH(min)</sub> = 2.4V
-
- @ I<sub>OH</sub> = -2mA, V<sub>DD</sub> = V<sub>DD(min)</sub>
- <br/>
- V<sub>OL(max)</sub> = 0.4V
-
- @ I<sub>OL</sub> = 2mA, V<sub>DD</sub> = V<sub>DD(min)</sub>
- </b>
- **LVCMOS *output* requirements**
- <b>
- V<sub>OH(min)</sub> = V<sub>DD</sub> − 0.2V
-
- @ I<sub>OH</sub> = -100μA, V<sub>DD</sub> = V<sub>DD(min)</sub>
- <br/>
- V<sub>OL(max)</sub> = 0.2V
-
- @ I<sub>OL</sub> = 100μA, V<sub>DD</sub> = V<sub>DD(min)</sub>
- </b>
#3: Post edited
by
Lorenzo Donati
·
2023-08-04T09:34:43Z (9 months ago)
- Sorry, but I have to challenge your premises when you say that most numbers are "round numbers" and that could be a reason for choosing some value.
- You compare those values by the number of ***decimal* digits**, but that's the wrong comparison.
- You should compare the ***significant* digits**.
- In fact what is important in any nominal value is its tolerance (i.e. relative accuracy), not its absolute accuracy.
- That's why many standard values are
- also standard [preferred values](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_series_of_preferred_numbers). It's a matter of tolerance spread.
- Here is the first decade of the E24 series (with E12 series values in bold):
- | | | | | | | |
- |-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
- |**1.0**| 1.1 |**1.2**| 1.3 |**1.5**| 1.6 |**1.8**|
- | 2.0 |**2.2**| 2.4 |**2.7**| 3.0 |**3.3**| 3.6 |
- |**3.9**| 4.3 |**4.7**| 5.1 |**5.6**| 6.2 |**6.8**|
- | 7.5 |**8.2**| 9.1 |
- These are the same series from which standard values for component parameters are taken (for example, resistance values for resistors or Zener voltage values for Zener diodes).
- Note that this cover many (most?) common "standard" voltage values, like for example: 12V, 15V, 18V, 24V, 75V, 120V, 240V.
- The only notable outlier is 5.0V.
- So, to answer your question, although the historical truth about that choice is quite obscure, I wouldn't rule out that when they decided they needed a standard voltage around 3V they simply picked the nearest E12 series value.
- <hr>
- **EDIT** (To integrate some more information I found)
- I stumbled across this JEITA (Japan Electronics and Information Technology Industries Association) document:
- [3.3V±0.3V (Normal Range), and 2.7V to 3.6V (Wide Range)
- Power Supply Voltage and Interface Standard for
- Nonterminated Digital Integrated Circuit](https://home.jeita.or.jp/tsc/std-pdf/ED5001A.pdf)
In which there is an explanatory section that reports some of the discussion history for the standardization (mentioning JEDEC). At page 5 reads (emphasis mine):- >A power supply voltage of digital circuits had been kept 5V,actually for a long time from 1980’s. But,
- in 1990’s, a requirement of low power supply voltage has become increasing to attain a low power
- consumption and a high noise immunity of electric equipments, in a main application of portable
- equipments (note PC, etc) which need a long battery operation and high performance equipments (WS,
- etc) which require a high speed.
- >
- >In 1990’s, also an age of deep sub-micron process technology (below 0.5μm process technology) has
- begun. Needs of low power supply voltage have become the most important issue to obtain a keeping
- of reliability and continuities of the trends of high density, high speed, together.
- According to above back ground, discussion for standard of low power supply voltage, firstly
- 3.3V,have begun in JEDEC, from early of 1990’s. 3.3V standard (JESD8-A) was enacted in
- June,1994, 2.5V standard (JESD8-5) was in October, 1995 and 1.8V standard (JESD8-7) was in
- February, 1997, respectively.
- >
- >**Especially, 3.3V JEDEC standard(JESD8-A) was required to maintain 5V TTL and 5V CMOS
- compatibility, because both 5V and 3.3V power supply voltages were used in a transition period from
- 5V to 3.3V when it was a first case of lower power supply voltage.** To obtain a 5V compatibility, this
- standard defined a specifications of LVTTL and LVCMOS.
- >
- ><br/>
- >
- >IC Low Voltage Operation Sub-committee began the discussion for standard of low power supply
- voltage since April, 1996 in EIAJ, according to JEDEC's activities of power supply discussion, in
- anticipation of a real popularization of 3.3V power supply voltage from the half of 1990’s and coming
- of next lower supply voltage than 3.3V.
- EIAJ standard of 3.3V power supply voltage was established in May, 1998. This standard
- corresponds to that of JEDEC about specifications, because it has been already known and used
- widely in the world. But, this standard is amended from that of JEDEC about notation and sentence
- for accomplishing the unify of them among three JEDEC standards (3.3V, 2.5V, 1.8V).
- <br/>
- So it seems that that value (the exact value probably chosen to be a preferred number) was chosen because the logic levels for digital CMOS IC chips were compatible with the existing CMOS and TTL 5V families.
- What does it exactly mean *compatible* in this context should be explained in that JESD8-A standard.
- I guess that it is something about input and output logic levels, but the diagrams in @Mu3 answer don't explain all the implications.
- Sorry, but I have to challenge your premises when you say that most numbers are "round numbers" and that could be a reason for choosing some value.
- You compare those values by the number of ***decimal* digits**, but that's the wrong comparison.
- You should compare the ***significant* digits**.
- In fact what is important in any nominal value is its tolerance (i.e. relative accuracy), not its absolute accuracy.
- That's why many standard values are
- also standard [preferred values](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_series_of_preferred_numbers). It's a matter of tolerance spread.
- Here is the first decade of the E24 series (with E12 series values in bold):
- | | | | | | | |
- |-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
- |**1.0**| 1.1 |**1.2**| 1.3 |**1.5**| 1.6 |**1.8**|
- | 2.0 |**2.2**| 2.4 |**2.7**| 3.0 |**3.3**| 3.6 |
- |**3.9**| 4.3 |**4.7**| 5.1 |**5.6**| 6.2 |**6.8**|
- | 7.5 |**8.2**| 9.1 |
- These are the same series from which standard values for component parameters are taken (for example, resistance values for resistors or Zener voltage values for Zener diodes).
- Note that this cover many (most?) common "standard" voltage values, like for example: 12V, 15V, 18V, 24V, 75V, 120V, 240V.
- The only notable outlier is 5.0V.
- So, to answer your question, although the historical truth about that choice is quite obscure, I wouldn't rule out that when they decided they needed a standard voltage around 3V they simply picked the nearest E12 series value.
- <hr>
- **EDIT** (To integrate some more information I found)
- I stumbled across this JEITA (Japan Electronics and Information Technology Industries Association) document:
- [3.3V±0.3V (Normal Range), and 2.7V to 3.6V (Wide Range)
- Power Supply Voltage and Interface Standard for
- Nonterminated Digital Integrated Circuit](https://home.jeita.or.jp/tsc/std-pdf/ED5001A.pdf)
- In which there is an explanatory section that reports some of the discussion history for the standardization (mentioning JEDEC). At page 5 it reads (emphasis mine):
- >A power supply voltage of digital circuits had been kept 5V,actually for a long time from 1980’s. But,
- in 1990’s, a requirement of low power supply voltage has become increasing to attain a low power
- consumption and a high noise immunity of electric equipments, in a main application of portable
- equipments (note PC, etc) which need a long battery operation and high performance equipments (WS,
- etc) which require a high speed.
- >
- >In 1990’s, also an age of deep sub-micron process technology (below 0.5μm process technology) has
- begun. Needs of low power supply voltage have become the most important issue to obtain a keeping
- of reliability and continuities of the trends of high density, high speed, together.
- According to above back ground, discussion for standard of low power supply voltage, firstly
- 3.3V,have begun in JEDEC, from early of 1990’s. 3.3V standard (JESD8-A) was enacted in
- June,1994, 2.5V standard (JESD8-5) was in October, 1995 and 1.8V standard (JESD8-7) was in
- February, 1997, respectively.
- >
- >**Especially, 3.3V JEDEC standard(JESD8-A) was required to maintain 5V TTL and 5V CMOS
- compatibility, because both 5V and 3.3V power supply voltages were used in a transition period from
- 5V to 3.3V when it was a first case of lower power supply voltage.** To obtain a 5V compatibility, this
- standard defined a specifications of LVTTL and LVCMOS.
- >
- ><br/>
- >
- >IC Low Voltage Operation Sub-committee began the discussion for standard of low power supply
- voltage since April, 1996 in EIAJ, according to JEDEC's activities of power supply discussion, in
- anticipation of a real popularization of 3.3V power supply voltage from the half of 1990’s and coming
- of next lower supply voltage than 3.3V.
- EIAJ standard of 3.3V power supply voltage was established in May, 1998. This standard
- corresponds to that of JEDEC about specifications, because it has been already known and used
- widely in the world. But, this standard is amended from that of JEDEC about notation and sentence
- for accomplishing the unify of them among three JEDEC standards (3.3V, 2.5V, 1.8V).
- <br/>
- So it seems that that value (the exact value probably chosen to be a preferred number) was chosen because the logic levels for digital CMOS IC chips were compatible with the existing CMOS and TTL 5V families.
- What does it exactly mean *compatible* in this context should be explained in that JESD8-A standard.
- I guess that it is something about input and output logic levels, but the diagrams in @Mu3 answer don't explain all the implications.
#2: Post edited
by
Lorenzo Donati
·
2023-08-04T09:33:53Z (9 months ago)
- Sorry, but I have to challenge your premises when you say that most numbers are "round numbers" and that could be a reason for choosing some value.
- You compare those values by the number of ***decimal* digits**, but that's the wrong comparison.
- You should compare the ***significant* digits**.
- In fact what is important in any nominal value is its tolerance (i.e. relative accuracy), not its absolute accuracy.
- That's why many standard values are
- also standard [preferred values](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_series_of_preferred_numbers). It's a matter of tolerance spread.
- Here is the first decade of the E24 series (with E12 series values in bold):
- | | | | | | | |
- |-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
- |**1.0**| 1.1 |**1.2**| 1.3 |**1.5**| 1.6 |**1.8**|
- | 2.0 |**2.2**| 2.4 |**2.7**| 3.0 |**3.3**| 3.6 |
- |**3.9**| 4.3 |**4.7**| 5.1 |**5.6**| 6.2 |**6.8**|
- | 7.5 |**8.2**| 9.1 |
- These are the same series from which standard values for component parameters are taken (for example, resistance values for resistors or Zener voltage values for Zener diodes).
- Note that this cover many (most?) common "standard" voltage values, like for example: 12V, 15V, 18V, 24V, 75V, 120V, 240V.
- The only notable outlier is 5.0V.
- So, to answer your question, although the historical truth about that choice is quite obscure, I wouldn't rule out that when they decided they needed a standard voltage around 3V they simply picked the nearest E12 series value.
- Sorry, but I have to challenge your premises when you say that most numbers are "round numbers" and that could be a reason for choosing some value.
- You compare those values by the number of ***decimal* digits**, but that's the wrong comparison.
- You should compare the ***significant* digits**.
- In fact what is important in any nominal value is its tolerance (i.e. relative accuracy), not its absolute accuracy.
- That's why many standard values are
- also standard [preferred values](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_series_of_preferred_numbers). It's a matter of tolerance spread.
- Here is the first decade of the E24 series (with E12 series values in bold):
- | | | | | | | |
- |-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
- |**1.0**| 1.1 |**1.2**| 1.3 |**1.5**| 1.6 |**1.8**|
- | 2.0 |**2.2**| 2.4 |**2.7**| 3.0 |**3.3**| 3.6 |
- |**3.9**| 4.3 |**4.7**| 5.1 |**5.6**| 6.2 |**6.8**|
- | 7.5 |**8.2**| 9.1 |
- These are the same series from which standard values for component parameters are taken (for example, resistance values for resistors or Zener voltage values for Zener diodes).
- Note that this cover many (most?) common "standard" voltage values, like for example: 12V, 15V, 18V, 24V, 75V, 120V, 240V.
- The only notable outlier is 5.0V.
- So, to answer your question, although the historical truth about that choice is quite obscure, I wouldn't rule out that when they decided they needed a standard voltage around 3V they simply picked the nearest E12 series value.
- <hr>
- **EDIT** (To integrate some more information I found)
- I stumbled across this JEITA (Japan Electronics and Information Technology Industries Association) document:
- [3.3V±0.3V (Normal Range), and 2.7V to 3.6V (Wide Range)
- Power Supply Voltage and Interface Standard for
- Nonterminated Digital Integrated Circuit](https://home.jeita.or.jp/tsc/std-pdf/ED5001A.pdf)
- In which there is an explanatory section that reports some of the discussion history for the standardization (mentioning JEDEC). At page 5 reads (emphasis mine):
- >A power supply voltage of digital circuits had been kept 5V,actually for a long time from 1980’s. But,
- in 1990’s, a requirement of low power supply voltage has become increasing to attain a low power
- consumption and a high noise immunity of electric equipments, in a main application of portable
- equipments (note PC, etc) which need a long battery operation and high performance equipments (WS,
- etc) which require a high speed.
- >
- >In 1990’s, also an age of deep sub-micron process technology (below 0.5μm process technology) has
- begun. Needs of low power supply voltage have become the most important issue to obtain a keeping
- of reliability and continuities of the trends of high density, high speed, together.
- According to above back ground, discussion for standard of low power supply voltage, firstly
- 3.3V,have begun in JEDEC, from early of 1990’s. 3.3V standard (JESD8-A) was enacted in
- June,1994, 2.5V standard (JESD8-5) was in October, 1995 and 1.8V standard (JESD8-7) was in
- February, 1997, respectively.
- >
- >**Especially, 3.3V JEDEC standard(JESD8-A) was required to maintain 5V TTL and 5V CMOS
- compatibility, because both 5V and 3.3V power supply voltages were used in a transition period from
- 5V to 3.3V when it was a first case of lower power supply voltage.** To obtain a 5V compatibility, this
- standard defined a specifications of LVTTL and LVCMOS.
- >
- ><br/>
- >
- >IC Low Voltage Operation Sub-committee began the discussion for standard of low power supply
- voltage since April, 1996 in EIAJ, according to JEDEC's activities of power supply discussion, in
- anticipation of a real popularization of 3.3V power supply voltage from the half of 1990’s and coming
- of next lower supply voltage than 3.3V.
- EIAJ standard of 3.3V power supply voltage was established in May, 1998. This standard
- corresponds to that of JEDEC about specifications, because it has been already known and used
- widely in the world. But, this standard is amended from that of JEDEC about notation and sentence
- for accomplishing the unify of them among three JEDEC standards (3.3V, 2.5V, 1.8V).
- <br/>
- So it seems that that value (the exact value probably chosen to be a preferred number) was chosen because the logic levels for digital CMOS IC chips were compatible with the existing CMOS and TTL 5V families.
- What does it exactly mean *compatible* in this context should be explained in that JESD8-A standard.
- I guess that it is something about input and output logic levels, but the diagrams in @Mu3 answer don't explain all the implications.
#1: Initial revision
by
Lorenzo Donati
·
2023-08-03T21:18:18Z (9 months ago)
Sorry, but I have to challenge your premises when you say that most numbers are "round numbers" and that could be a reason for choosing some value. You compare those values by the number of ***decimal* digits**, but that's the wrong comparison. You should compare the ***significant* digits**. In fact what is important in any nominal value is its tolerance (i.e. relative accuracy), not its absolute accuracy. That's why many standard values are also standard [preferred values](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_series_of_preferred_numbers). It's a matter of tolerance spread. Here is the first decade of the E24 series (with E12 series values in bold): | | | | | | | | |-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------| |**1.0**| 1.1 |**1.2**| 1.3 |**1.5**| 1.6 |**1.8**| | 2.0 |**2.2**| 2.4 |**2.7**| 3.0 |**3.3**| 3.6 | |**3.9**| 4.3 |**4.7**| 5.1 |**5.6**| 6.2 |**6.8**| | 7.5 |**8.2**| 9.1 | These are the same series from which standard values for component parameters are taken (for example, resistance values for resistors or Zener voltage values for Zener diodes). Note that this cover many (most?) common "standard" voltage values, like for example: 12V, 15V, 18V, 24V, 75V, 120V, 240V. The only notable outlier is 5.0V. So, to answer your question, although the historical truth about that choice is quite obscure, I wouldn't rule out that when they decided they needed a standard voltage around 3V they simply picked the nearest E12 series value.