SNAA426 June 2025 CDC6C

3 Radiated Emissions Test Results

For each oscillator device under test, an input voltage of 3.3V was applied from a low-noise power board. Figure 3-1 shows the test setup and associated connections for the power supply and CDC6C EVM oscillator board.

Figure 3-1 Radiated Emissions Test Setup Circuit Board Connections

Figure 3-2 shows the filtering circuitry for the 3.3V power supply. This contains a low noise LDO that provides a 3.3V source to the CDC6C EVM oscillator board which contains additional bypass capacitors for noise filtering.

Figure 3-2 Radiated Emissions Test Setup Schematic

The CDC6C and competitor oscillators were soldered on to the CDC6C EVM and tested one at a time. Radiated emissions data was collected in a pre-compliant CISPR-32 radiated emissions setup using horizontal antenna orientation. Table 3-1 summarizes the devices tested and the associated frequency.

Table 3-1 Devices Under Test

Manufacturer	Part Number	Frequency
TI	CDC6CE025000EDLFR	25MHz
TI	CDC6CE050000EDLER	50MHz
TI	CDC6CE024000EDLER	24MHz
Competitor A	Competitor A	25MHz
Competitor B	Competitor B	50MHz
Competitor C	Competitor C	24MHz

Figure 3-3 and Figure 3-4 show emissions performance across frequency for the 25MHz devices, Competitor A quartz oscillator and CDC6CE025000EDLFR BAW oscillator respectively. Table 3-2 highlights how TI BAW oscillator can have between 1dB to 4dB emissions improvement versus the quartz oscillator tested.

Figure 3-3 Competitor A Quartz Oscillator

Figure 3-4 CDC6CE025000EDLFR BAW Oscillator

Table 3-2 Competitor A v. CDC6CE025000EDLFR Peak Emissions Comparison

Frequency	Competitor A	CDC6CE025000EDLFR	TI Delta
75MHz	23dB	25dB	+2dB worse
175MHz	No spur above 11dB baseline	No spur above 10dB baseline	-1dB better
225MHz	No spur above 10dB baseline	No spur above 11dB baseline	+1dB worse
250MHz	No spur above 9dB baseline	No spur above 5dB baseline	-4dB better
275MHz	25dB	24dB	-1dB better

Figure 3-5 and Figure 3-6 show emissions performance across frequency for the 50MHz devices, Competitor B quartz oscillator and CDC6CE050000EDLER BAW oscillator respectively. Table 3-3 highlights how TI BAW oscillator can have between 2dB to 6dB emissions improvement versus the quartz oscillator tested.

Figure 3-5 Competitor B Quartz Oscillator

Figure 3-6 CDC6CE050000EDLER BAW Oscillator

Table 3-3 Competitor B v. CDC6CE050000EDLER Peak Emissions Comparison

Frequency	Competitor B	CDC6C050000EDLER	TI Delta
100MHz	17dB	No spur above 15dB baseline	-2dB better
150MHz	24dB	19dB	-5dB better
200MHz	24dB	No spur above 18dB baseline	-6dB better
250MHz	24dB	25dB	+1dB worse
350MHz	24dB	28dB	+4dB worse
450MHz	27dB	24dB	-3dB better
500MHz	31dB	No spur above 25dB baseline	-6dB better
550MHz	30dB	No spur above 26dB baseline	-4dB better
600MHz	30dB	No spur above 26dB baseline	-4dB better
650MHz	No spur above 30dB baseline	No spur above 30dB baseline	Similar

Figure 3-7 and Figure 3-8 show emissions performance across frequency for the 24MHz devices, Competitor C quartz oscillator and CDC6CE024000EDLER BAW oscillator respectively. Table 3-4 highlights how TI BAW oscillator can have between 3dB to 18dB emissions improvement versus the quartz oscillator tested.

Figure 3-7 Competitor C Quartz Oscillator

Figure 3-8 CDC6CE024000EDLER BAW Oscillator

Table 3-4 Competitor C v. CDC6CE024000EDLER Peak Emission Comparison

Frequency	Competitor C	CDC6CE024000EDLER	TI Delta
72MHz	18dB	20dB	+2dB worse
120MHz	No spur above 11dB baseline	No spur above 11dB baseline	Similar
168MHz	23dB	No spur above 20dB baseline	-3dB better
216MHz	22dB	No spur above 19dB baseline	-3dB better
264MHz	29dB	No spur above 11dB baseline	-18dB better
312MHz	No spur above 13dB baseline	No spur above 9dB baseline	-4dB better

Analyzing the results as a whole, on average TI CDC6C BAW oscillator exhibits lower radiated emission levels than the traditional crystal clock quartz oscillators tested.