For the MAX V (EPM570 in this case) does the automotive part (A5) have different timing specs than the industrial temp part (I5)?
I have a customer doing a design in a MAX V and it passes timing if he chooses the A5 part but fails timing if he chooses the I5 part.
Are you sure it is MAX V device?
I see EPM'570 belongs to MAX II Family Signature.
Kindly reconfirm your device by refering to MAX II and MAX V handbook below from Packaging Ordering Information.
There is no 'Timing' difference in automotive part and industrial part but has difference in 'Operating Temperature'.
Check the link below - Table 2 (Page 3)
Did you test in different temperature room? Because difference in temperature could affect electrical components in FPGA's degrade in time.
Check the link below, it might be helpful for you.
Can you (or someone else) explain why my customer (and I) get different results from TimeQuest depending on whether we choose an I5 or an A5 device? I would think that Quartus would provide the exact same place and route. However, when the customer compiled the same design for 4 different MAX V 570 devices (different speed grade/temp range) here are his results:
I took the design and compiled it under the 4 different speed grades and looked at FMax. From what I can tell the I5/C5 have same timing, A5 is faster, and C4 is fastest. I know that they keep implying that the A5 is just a "binned" I5/C5 but that is certainly not what the Timing Analyzer seems to be reporting.
FMAX: A5 C4 C5 I5
-------------- ----------- ----------- - ---------- -----------
smclk (24MHz): 30.24 MHz 51.1 MHz 25.48 MHz 25.48 MHz
lclk (66MHz): 65.33 MHz 128.5 MHz 65.33 MHz 65.33 MHz
Can you explain the difference in timing reported by TimeQuest when specifying either an I5 or A5 part? When I look in the documentation I would expect them to have the same timing results.