IRFP140N vs IRFP240

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Jump to Latest
T

till

Banned
Joined 2002
I know a lot is writen about quality of different Mosfets like IRFP044 / 040 / 140 /240 /N - labeld ones, 150... in this Board.

Sorry but i´m not able to see which one i should use: IRFP140N and IRFP 240 are avaible for ca. same price, which one is better?

thanks for an answer, hope someone knows.
 
JBL

JBL

Member
Joined 2001
The difference is their voltage rating. The IRFP140N as a 100V rating and the IRFP240 a 200v rating.

IT's all depend on the voltage rail of your project.

BTW I use IRFP250N instead of IRFP240N it have a higher rating and is generally cheaper.
 
AudioFreak

AudioFreak

On Holiday
Joined 2001
diyaudio.com
As stated above, they have different voltage ratings but the N series devices are usually not really suitable for our purposes as they are primarily a switching fet and have a much smaller die (so they have much lower power dissipation capabilities) compared to the standard range. This also allows the N series to be significantly cheaper. Given the 2 devices listed, I would definately use the IRFP240.
 
J

Joe Berry

Member
Joined 2001
Paid Member
I wouldn't shy away from using the IRFP140N in a lower-voltage (40Vds or less) high-bias application where only N-channel MOSFETs are used, such as in the Pass Zen amplifier projects.

However, I wouldn't recommend them for projects requiring a complementary output stage, as last time I checked, the P-channel counterpart to the IRFP140N was more than twice as expensive. The IRFP240 and IRFP9240 are much closer in cost.
 
T

till

Banned
Joined 2002
Thank you, i understand the difference in the size of the die now. In fact for me the IRFP140N would cost 1,50Euro, the IRFP240 1,40 Euro, the IRFP150N i used is 1,95 Euro, the IRFP150 1,40 Euro.

I know the datasheets for IRFP150N/240.

What i don´t know is the Quality in relation of the THD they cause. In the ZEN artivles Nelson says the lower the voltage the bettter, but nothing about this "N".

OK, if there is nothing against i´ll take IRFP240.

btw. i will use them for the ZEN variations, experiments with small alephs etc.
 
AudioFreak

AudioFreak

On Holiday
Joined 2001
diyaudio.com
The lower voltage devices do contribe less THD but as stated above, I wouldnt bother using the N series devices as you'll either have to use more of them or x50N devices whose specs aren't as favourable as x40 devices... If you can get hold of IRFP140 devices they are the pick of the litter for lower voltage amps but they are becoming harder to obtain as the N series devices take over.
 
S

stappvargen

Member
Joined 2002
As promitheus says, the N devices have different(lower!) capacitance in comparisson to the larger die devices. So unless you are going to drive the FET hard, a N device might perform better.

(Example: IRFP044: Ciss = 2500pF, IRFP044N: Ciss=1500pF, RdsON is the same (0.02Ohm))

Regards,
Niclas
 
EUVL

EUVL

Member
Joined 2003
xen-audio.com
> (Example: IRFP044: Ciss = 2500pF, IRFP044N: Ciss=1500pF, RdsON is the same (0.02Ohm))

You forgot to mention that the N type is specified at 120W, with thermal resistance of 1.3°C/W, whereas the 044 is specified at 180W, with 0.83°C/W.

> Today I have tested APT5015BVR N-Fet. I think it was as good as IRFP240.

In my opinion a even better alternative, be it more expensice / less available :

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=661150#post661150


Patrick
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Top Bottom