Author Topic: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs  (Read 19695 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline EEVblogTopic starter

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 37661
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« on: November 10, 2021, 10:14:52 am »
Dave looks at his TOP 5 (plus change) Jellybean OPAMP's, and explains why you need to know them.



00:00 - Jellybean OPAMP's
01:47 - LM358
07:51 - FET Input TL071/72/74
11:28 - CMOS LMV358
15:17 - LM324
17:23 - The LM321 is NOT a thing
19:09 - Oh, all right, the LM741
19:41 - RC4558
21:11 - The Audiophiles go WILD! The NE5532
22:06 - OP07 Precision OPAMP
 
The following users thanked this post: SeanB, bingo600

Offline T3sl4co1l

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21606
  • Country: us
  • Expert, Analog Electronics, PCB Layout, EMC
    • Seven Transistor Labs
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #1 on: November 10, 2021, 10:23:33 am »
TLV2372 didn't make the list smh ;)

Tim
Seven Transistor Labs, LLC
Electronic design, from concept to prototype.
Bringing a project to life?  Send me a message!
 

Online Kleinstein

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14072
  • Country: de
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #2 on: November 10, 2021, 01:40:31 pm »
The Ti datasheet for the TL07x is confusing. It includes the TL07x H series and these are totally different (CMOS) parts. It is still a good OP but a bloody cunfusing part numbering  :rant:.  Looks like the want to carry over the old part number and sell cheaper to make CMOS chips. They are good in some repects, but also worse than the old in other aspects.  There are a few threads about this, e.g.: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/beginners/tl072-minimum-supply/msg3680230/#msg3680230

The NE5534 is the single version, not the quad.  Again a bit confusing numbering (like the LM2904 LM2902 for the dual and quad). The note with the need for external compensation is good however.

The RC4558 is sometimes called equavalent to 741, but it is actually a quite differente OP: higher BW, lower noise,... more like half the way to the NE5532. Closer to an dual 741 is the MC1458 /1558. The RC4558 is still a good yellybeen part - wish there would be a single version (because of the lower power).

The LM321 is a tricky one:
 often they are LM358 dies with just 1 half used. The current per OP is twice. AFAIK a few are actually single dies. SO unleess you really need a small case one could as well use the 358.
There is another odd point: there was a seprate chip with LM321 part number and this was not a single OP.


AFAIK there is no direct dual or even quad OP07. With the relatively high power consumption this would also no be practical. There are duals and quads from later improved versions - e.g. as my new favorite replacement OPA202 / OPA2202 / OPA4202. In the old days this was more like AD704,705/706.
 
The following users thanked this post: EEVblog, exe, Per Hansson

Offline ormaaj

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 20
  • Country: us
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #3 on: November 10, 2021, 02:40:58 pm »
How did these end up being made by multiple manufacturers under the same model name? Does the mask mark expire and somehow another company either gets ahold of it or reverse engineers it from samples?

Also how does it make economic sense to use masks from the 70s?? For maximum cheap, you should balance cheapest process technology with maximum parts per wafer and minimum out-of-tolerance yield loss. But each of these parts has a separate lineage of improved versions from each manufacturer. Those derivatives are unsurprisingly rarely made by more than one manufacturer. Surprisingly though, such parts rarely compete with the ancient originals on cost and somehow never manage to obsolete them. Was copying one another's model names just a trendy thing that went away by the 2000s?
 
The following users thanked this post: robballantyne

Offline T3sl4co1l

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21606
  • Country: us
  • Expert, Analog Electronics, PCB Layout, EMC
    • Seven Transistor Labs
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #4 on: November 10, 2021, 04:01:13 pm »
I certainly don't have a complete history of multiple sourcing, but it's my understanding that, a lot of that was driven by direct military requirement.  Keep in mind, silicon valley has always been closely integrated with the military-industrial complex; they are what enabled ever more advanced and compact missile guidance, RADAR, countermeasures, cryptography, etc. -- everything from bombs to bugs.  So, it pays to have one spec (e.g. JEDEC 2Nxxxx series) and everyone makes parts that fit them.  I don't know what the extent of systems like JEDEC really was/is, why they didn't put amplifiers in there for example (but some quite complex optos are, take 6N137 for example), but in any case, op-amps and comparators and everything else were certainly too important to pass up, plus everyone needed them for commercial purposes anyway, so why not make a copy and get your toe in the door?

As for origin, I don't know if that was by licensing, copying (reverse engineering (RE)), or parallel development, and how much of each.  Certainly if nothing else, some work was required to get one chip design working on another fab line, fabs were especially finicky back then (and, I would suppose, are only so much worse today -- they're just also better at abstracting it out via simulation and synthesis tools).

One famous case I do know was by licensing: the only reason AMD has x86 to this day (well, to this day, who knows what else might've happened through history, right, but this is how it started anyway), is because the military insisted upon second sourcing the CPUs and so made Intel and AMD do a cross-licensing deal.  That, or to address anticompetitive action?  Now I can't remember... anyway, it's a well recorded part of computer history.

(In contrast, Cyrix, or a couple of others I think, got the 486 by RE.  So, more than just the two giants in that era of x86 history.)

Tim
Seven Transistor Labs, LLC
Electronic design, from concept to prototype.
Bringing a project to life?  Send me a message!
 
The following users thanked this post: ormaaj

Online tszaboo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7306
  • Country: nl
  • Current job: ATEX product design
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #5 on: November 10, 2021, 06:36:22 pm »
I guessed right 5 of these on list before playing the video. What did I win?
 

Offline Per Hansson

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 428
  • Country: se
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #6 on: November 10, 2021, 07:01:12 pm »
I guessed right 5 of these on list before playing the video. What did I win?
A LM741
 

Offline David Hess

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16545
  • Country: us
  • DavidH
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #7 on: November 10, 2021, 07:55:59 pm »
1. The 741 obviously, although the 301A is practically the same part and more universal.  There is little reason to use a 741, but the 301A has all of the same virtues and additional capabilities beyond most modern parts through its external compensation which allows clamping.
2. The TL071/TL072/TL074 are the last survivors of the jelly bean JFET input parts.  The National LF series JFETs were jelly bean parts in the past.
3. The NE5532, or one of this variations.
4. The OP-07 despite being completely obsoleted by improved parts.  The virtue of the OP-07 is that it is widely second sourced making it the cheapest precision part.
5. LM358/LM324 - These are dual and quad versions of the same part.  The single version never became popular.

The RC4558 is sometimes called equavalent to 741, but it is actually a quite differente OP: higher BW, lower noise,... more like half the way to the NE5532. Closer to an dual 741 is the MC1458 /1558. The RC4558 is still a good yellybeen part - wish there would be a single version (because of the lower power).

The RC4558, like the RC4136, use a completely different topology than the 741.  The 741 and 301 use cascaded NPN and PNP pairs to combine the performance of the NPN transistors with the high base-emitter breakdown voltage of the PNP transistors.   The RC4558 and RC4136 use only the PNP differential pair.  Besides the performance difference, the input bias current is reversed between the 741 and 4558.  I am not sure if the RC4558 and RC4136 achieve small die size through transconductance reduction; the schematics do not show it but often it is left out, and the shown compensation capacitance is pretty high, although that could be marked wrong also.

The 1458 is closer to a dual 741 because it uses the same NPN and PNP input stage arrangement, but the 1458 includes transconductance reduction so the internal compensation capacitor can be much smaller saving space and allowing room for a dual part.  The LM348 quad 741 also uses transconductance reduction for the same reason.

AFAIK there is no direct dual or even quad OP07. With the relatively high power consumption this would also no be practical. There are duals and quads from later improved versions - e.g. as my new favorite replacement OPA202 / OPA2202 / OPA4202. In the old days this was more like AD704,705/706.

The OP-207 was a dual OP-07.  If PMI made a quad OP-07, it should be in their last databook before Analog Devices bought them.  I doubt a quad OP-07 was ever considered because how would offset null be brought out?  The dual OP-207 was only available in a 14 pin package, and they even brought out separate power supply pins.  It was probably a single die and not two OP-07 dies because of parameter matching.

Linear Technology made a dual OP-07 in the form of their LT1002 which was functionally and pin compatible with the OP-207, so PMI was not the only one who saw a demand for such a part.

How did these end up being made by multiple manufacturers under the same model name? Does the mask mark expire and somehow another company either gets ahold of it or reverse engineers it from samples?

Reverse engineering was common, and then patents were either cross licensed or sometimes an implementation was made which avoided the patents.  Sometimes even the same part from the same manufacturer is implemented later with a different layout.

Quote
Also how does it make economic sense to use masks from the 70s?? For maximum cheap, you should balance cheapest process technology with maximum parts per wafer and minimum out-of-tolerance yield loss.

These parts still require a 44 volt bipolar NPN process with lateral PNPs for level shifting and high base-emitter breakdown voltage, which means using the processing steps of an old process if the performance and functionality is to be comparable, and those old processes use a minimum number of mask steps making them less expensive.

How much smaller is a "modern" 44 volt process compared to that?  Parts like the 1458 and 348 were made much smaller on the same old process allowing dual and quads by using techniques like transconductance reduction.

As far as I know, a modern 44 volt NPN process can be implemented with finer geometry, and I am sure this has been done for "modern" 44 volt precision parts, but that would have little benefit in area reduction of a 741 design with its large internal compensation capacitance.

Quote
But each of these parts has a separate lineage of improved versions from each manufacturer. Those derivatives are unsurprisingly rarely made by more than one manufacturer. Surprisingly though, such parts rarely compete with the ancient originals on cost and somehow never manage to obsolete them. Was copying one another's model names just a trendy thing that went away by the 2000s?

Those improved versions take just as much area to provide the same features so are not any cheaper.  When I look through TI's parts, the only 741 replacements which are less expensive are parts which use less die area because of a smaller compensation capacitor allowed by transconductance reduction.  The smaller "improved" 741 is the 1458.

Note that one of the rare features of the 741 which is commonly not found in modern parts is wide differential input voltage range.  This is difficult to duplicate on a "modern" high performance process, and parts built on a modern process with a differential input voltage range greater then about 7 volts are rare or non-existent.  Offhand I cannot name any, and I have looked for them before.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2021, 08:08:58 pm by David Hess »
 
The following users thanked this post: EEVblog

Offline Cerebus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10576
  • Country: gb
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #8 on: November 10, 2021, 08:06:48 pm »
I guessed right 5 of these on list before playing the video. What did I win?

Only third place I'm afraid, a no-expenses paid, 2 day, trip to Clacton-on-Sea (Second prize was 1 day, and 1st prize you don't have to go at all).
Anybody got a syringe I can use to squeeze the magic smoke back into this?
 
The following users thanked this post: SilverSolder, Per Hansson

Offline PartialDischarge

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1611
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #9 on: November 10, 2021, 08:12:32 pm »
I don't have any jellybean opamps, I just search by the required specs and select a # of possible parts for the project.
In contrast to diodes or transistors, for which I have jellybean parts, opamps are so complex and have such a large # of specs that I prefer to do it this way.

 

Offline David Hess

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16545
  • Country: us
  • DavidH
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #10 on: November 10, 2021, 08:49:22 pm »
I don't have any jellybean opamps, I just search by the required specs and select a # of possible parts for the project.
In contrast to diodes or transistors, for which I have jellybean parts, opamps are so complex and have such a large # of specs that I prefer to do it this way.

Some operational amplifiers are "universal" in the sense of covering a wide range of applications.  The 741 fits this because of its good performance and wide differential and common mode input range which made it "universal" compared to the previous parts it replaced.  Later the 324/358 became universal for single supply applications.
 

Offline rvalente

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 722
  • Country: br
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #11 on: November 10, 2021, 09:01:08 pm »
Mates,

Considering this jelly beam op amps in dual and quad versions for symmetric supply (+9V and -9V) which of them would have the lowest offset?
 

Offline PartialDischarge

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1611
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #12 on: November 10, 2021, 09:08:05 pm »

Some operational amplifiers are "universal" in the sense of covering a wide range of applications.  The 741 fits this because of its good performance and wide differential and common mode input range which made it "universal" compared to the previous parts it replaced.  Later the 324/358 became universal for single supply applications.
The 741 is the opamp I learnt with and studied in college, what disqualifies it for me even in prototypes is the big size, I tend to use SOT23-5 or Soic-8. I don’t use breadboards, don’t even own one, only perfboards with thin soldered wires for the prototypes
 

Offline rvalente

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 722
  • Country: br
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #13 on: November 10, 2021, 09:10:24 pm »

Some operational amplifiers are "universal" in the sense of covering a wide range of applications.  The 741 fits this because of its good performance and wide differential and common mode input range which made it "universal" compared to the previous parts it replaced.  Later the 324/358 became universal for single supply applications.
The 741 is the opamp I learnt with and studied in college, what disqualifies it for me even in prototypes is the big size, I tend to use SOT23-5 or Soic-8. I don’t use breadboards, don’t even own one, only perfboards with thin soldered wires for the prototypes

I just do the same thing. 100mil perfboard, 0805 caps/resistors and enamel wire. Breadboards/protobards are terrible little devils
 

Offline David Hess

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16545
  • Country: us
  • DavidH
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #14 on: November 10, 2021, 09:14:46 pm »
Considering this jelly beam op amps in dual and quad versions for symmetric supply (+9V and -9V) which of them would have the lowest offset?

The only precision part listed is the OP-07.
 

Offline Unixon

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 396
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #15 on: November 10, 2021, 11:14:13 pm »
Q1: What is a typical industry practice of coming up with a standard pinout across different manufacturers?
Q2: Op amps that provide additional connections to internal nodes for tuning vs op amps that don't. Pros, cons, examples. Will an external circuit ever be better than on-die circuit considering part characteristic matching and temperature dependency of everything etc?
 

Offline rvalente

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 722
  • Country: br
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #16 on: November 10, 2021, 11:24:46 pm »
Generally single op amp follow tl741 pinou, dual lm358 pinout, quad lm324. Those with dual offset or shutdown have special pinouts.
 

Offline rvalente

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 722
  • Country: br
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #17 on: November 10, 2021, 11:25:51 pm »
Considering this jelly beam op amps in dual and quad versions for symmetric supply (+9V and -9V) which of them would have the lowest offset?

Expanding the list a little, which dual and quad jellybean with the best offset?

The only precision part listed is the OP-07.

 

Offline cortex_m0

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 114
  • Country: us
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #18 on: November 11, 2021, 04:54:46 am »
Dave should have reached out to Texas Instruments for a sponsorship!  :-+

I think this is a good list. A reminder that while an op-amp can be used as a comparator, but a comparator chip will often provide better results. The LM293/LM393 family is a jellybean in that group. Whoa, there's Texas Instruments again   :-//

If you need 1.8Vcc operation, MCP6L01/2/4 is my go-to. Designed to mirror the LMV324 specs IIRC. I'm not actually aware of an Op-Amp that has 1.8Vcc operation and second-sourcing.
 

Offline David Hess

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16545
  • Country: us
  • DavidH
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #19 on: November 11, 2021, 05:09:13 am »
Q1: What is a typical industry practice of coming up with a standard pinout across different manufacturers?

If you are big enough, then you get to decide the standard.

Quote
Q2: Op amps that provide additional connections to internal nodes for tuning vs op amps that don't. Pros, cons, examples. Will an external circuit ever be better than on-die circuit considering part characteristic matching and temperature dependency of everything etc?

External offset null capability always provides a boost in performance if used, and it provides an even larger boost in performance for precision parts because for them, it also corrects input offset voltage drift.  External offset null can also be automated, and provides some unusual functionality in esoteric designs.  For instance the 318 can be used as an output stage for a composite amplifier through its offset null pins with its inputs disabled.  Another weird use is to inject a current into one external offset null pin to turn a precision operational amplifier into a precision temperature sensor.

External compensation allows for tuning of dynamic performance which cannot easily be replicated in a part without it, but nothing modern supports it.
 

Offline David Hess

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16545
  • Country: us
  • DavidH
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #20 on: November 11, 2021, 05:35:22 am »
Expanding the list a little, which dual and quad jellybean with the best offset?

The LT1013 and LT1014 are probably the closest to "jellybean" dual and quad precision parts because they have multiple sources now.  These are precision alternatives designed by Linear Technology for the LM358 and LM324 single supply dual and quad jellybean parts.
 
The following users thanked this post: rvalente

Offline Cerebus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10576
  • Country: gb
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #21 on: November 11, 2021, 11:48:44 am »
Expanding the list a little, which dual and quad jellybean with the best offset?

The LT1013 and LT1014 are probably the closest to "jellybean" dual and quad precision parts because they have multiple sources now.  These are precision alternatives designed by Linear Technology for the LM358 and LM324 single supply dual and quad jellybean parts.

Not exactly "jellybean" pricewise though - a reel of 2500 of the lowest grade of the TI second sourced ones will still set you you back £1 each, they're more like £2 each in small quantities. Still a good part for the money, in particular the long term drift in input offset voltage is better than you'll find on many much more expensive precision OPAs.
Anybody got a syringe I can use to squeeze the magic smoke back into this?
 

Offline rvalente

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 722
  • Country: br
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #22 on: November 11, 2021, 01:00:59 pm »
Expanding the list a little, which dual and quad jellybean with the best offset?

The LT1013 and LT1014 are probably the closest to "jellybean" dual and quad precision parts because they have multiple sources now.  These are precision alternatives designed by Linear Technology for the LM358 and LM324 single supply dual and quad jellybean parts.

Not exactly "jellybean" pricewise though - a reel of 2500 of the lowest grade of the TI second sourced ones will still set you you back £1 each, they're more like £2 each in small quantities. Still a good part for the money, in particular the long term drift in input offset voltage is better than you'll find on many much more expensive precision OPAs.

Great tip, this is what I was looking for, tks mate
 

Online tszaboo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7306
  • Country: nl
  • Current job: ATEX product design
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #23 on: November 11, 2021, 01:26:45 pm »
I don't have any jellybean opamps, I just search by the required specs and select a # of possible parts for the project.
In contrast to diodes or transistors, for which I have jellybean parts, opamps are so complex and have such a large # of specs that I prefer to do it this way.

Some operational amplifiers are "universal" in the sense of covering a wide range of applications.  The 741 fits this because of its good performance and wide differential and common mode input range which made it "universal" compared to the previous parts it replaced.  Later the 324/358 became universal for single supply applications.
Yes, they are very good for a lot of applications. Unfortunately, there aren't many low power opamps which would be jelly bean. I mean less than 10uA, but rather 1uA Iq. The other part that I would really like to see is shunt reference, that would work with just 1uA current. I have 1-2 parts that do this, but they are relatively expensive, and no second source.
 

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 26751
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: EEVBlog 1436 - The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMPs
« Reply #24 on: November 11, 2021, 02:03:47 pm »
I don't have any jellybean opamps, I just search by the required specs and select a # of possible parts for the project.
In contrast to diodes or transistors, for which I have jellybean parts, opamps are so complex and have such a large # of specs that I prefer to do it this way.
Same here. I have a whole bunch of opamps in my component database but it happens regulary that I add a different/new opamp to it due to the requirements of the circuit which doesn't fit an opamp I have used before.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf