cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

LDO for STM32H573AII3Q

madhu1
Associate II

STM32H573AII3Q is a 169 pin UFBGA SMPS package. Along with SMPS option, does it also have internal LDO for core supply? Can we use internal LDO to supply core voltage for this package?

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions
SofLit
ST Employee

Hello @madhu1 ,

Only SMPS is supported by this package. And according to the reference manual:

SofLit_0-1708509182207.png

So the package has only one PWR config: SMPS or LDO.

To give better visibility on the answered topics, please click on "Accept as Solution" on the reply which solved your issue or answered your question.

View solution in original post

4 REPLIES 4
SofLit
ST Employee

Hello @madhu1 ,

Only SMPS is supported by this package. And according to the reference manual:

SofLit_0-1708509182207.png

So the package has only one PWR config: SMPS or LDO.

To give better visibility on the answered topics, please click on "Accept as Solution" on the reply which solved your issue or answered your question.

Hello,

I think it has both option. Even for SMPS power scheme, there is a LDO shown internal to uC. Refer below image: Please let me know if my understanding is correct.

madhu1_1-1708515188471.png

 

 

 

Indeed the LDO is there on the die but it is disabled by HW as already said in RM section 10.5.1.

To give better visibility on the answered topics, please click on "Accept as Solution" on the reply which solved your issue or answered your question.

I was also a bit confused on my STM32U5A5 with LDO vs. SPMS:

  • these are two different order options!
  • the pins are different
  • if SMPS chip version - you have to enable SMPS

As I understand it: there is NOT an option to decide between LDO or SMPS (it is a bonding feature, a package feature).

And my datasheet says clearly (as I understand): SMPS version does not have CAP for LDO. So, I assume, there is not an LDO option.

SMPS_vs_LDO.png

It might be misleading to see "LDO regulator": potentially, it should be marked as "bonding variant". The note 2. makes it clear for me, that LDO is not an option on an SMPS package.