Chip vs Chip

CC2642R vs BlueNRG-LP

<\/script>\n
'; }, get iframeSnippet() { const domain = '{ SITE_DOMAIN }'; const type = '{ embed_type }'; const slug = '{ embed_slug }'; return ''; }, get activeSnippet() { return this.method === 'script' ? this.scriptSnippet : this.iframeSnippet; }, copySnippet() { navigator.clipboard.writeText(this.activeSnippet).then(() => { this.copied = true; setTimeout(() => { this.copied = false; }, 2000); }); } }" @keydown.escape.window="open = false" @click.outside="open = false">

Embed This Widget

Theme


      
    


    
    

      Widget powered by
      .
      Free, no account required.
    

  




    
    
Side-by-side comparison of CC2642R and BlueNRG-LP BLE SoCs.

    
    

      
    

  


  
  
  

    
      

        A
        
CC2642R

      

      

    
    
      

        B
        
BlueNRG-LP

      

      

    
  

  

  
  

  






  
  

    
CC2642R vs BlueNRG-LP: Industrial Sensor Controller vs Ultra-Low-Power Medical BLE


The TI CC2642R and ST BlueNRG-LP are both ultra-low-power BLE chips, but they embody different architectural philosophies for achieving long battery life. CC2642R uses a Sensor Controller Engine to autonomously sample peripherals. BlueNRG-LP achieves sub-5 nA deep sleep through aggressive power gating on a minimal Cortex-M0+ core — the choice for disposable medical patches and body-worn sensors.




Overview


CC2642R is a 48 MHz Cortex-M4F with 352 KB Flash, 80 KB RAM, BLE 5.2, Sensor Controller Engine (~0.6 µA autonomous sensing), and ~1.4 µA standby. Its M4F core with FPU and DSP instructions handles complex sensor fusion and BLE profiles.


BlueNRG-LP is a 64 MHz Cortex-M0+ with 256 KB Flash, 64 KB RAM, BLE 5.3, and a power architecture achieving < 5 nA deep sleep and ~4.4 mA RX current. Up to 8 simultaneous BLE connections, certified medical ATT">GATT profiles, and a 2.7 × 2.1 mm WLCSP package make it optimized for disposable and body-worn healthcare devices.




Key Differences


    

  • Deep sleep current: BlueNRG-LP achieves < 5 nA — more than 200× lower than CC2642R's ~1.4 µA standby.
    • 

  • Package size: BlueNRG-LP WLCSP is 2.7 × 2.1 mm; CC2642R QFN is 7 × 7 mm — BlueNRG-LP fits on disposable sensor patches.
    • 

  • CPU architecture: CC2642R M4F (FPU, DSP, 48 MHz) handles complex computation; BlueNRG-LP M0+ (64 MHz) is simpler and more power-efficient.
    • 

  • Sensor Controller: CC2642R's SCE samples sensors autonomously at ~0.6 µA; BlueNRG-LP has no SCE.
    • 

  • Medical profiles: BlueNRG-LP ships with certified BLE medical GATT profiles (Glucose, Blood Pressure, Heart Rate); CC2642R requires custom profile development on the TI BLE stack.
    • 

  • BLE connections: BlueNRG-LP supports up to 8 simultaneous connections; CC2642R supports multiple but is typically used in single central/peripheral roles.
    • 

  • Memory: CC2642R has significantly more RAM (80 KB vs 64 KB) and comparable Flash.
    • 

  • Industrial temperature: CC2642R has industrial-grade variants; BlueNRG-LP is consumer/medical grade.
    • 





Use Cases


Choose CC2642R for industrial BLE sensor nodes leveraging the Sensor Controller for autonomous ADC/I2C sampling, applications requiring M4F compute for signal processing and sensor fusion, and environments with industrial temperature requirements.


Choose BlueNRG-LP for medical-grade disposable sensors, CR2032 blood pressure monitors, continuous glucose monitor accessories, body temperature patches, and any wearable or implantable sensor where < 5 nA sleep current and 2–3 mm² footprint are primary specifications.




Verdict


BlueNRG-LP wins on deep sleep power and physical size — two critical metrics for disposable medical patches and long-term wearables. CC2642R wins on compute capability, autonomous sensor sampling, and industrial robustness. Neither is better in absolute terms — the right choice depends on whether the product requires a tiny disposable footprint (BlueNRG-LP) or autonomous multi-sensor acquisition with compute-intensive signal processing (CC2642R).

  

  

  
  

  
  

    




  
자주 묻는 질문


  

    
    

      
      

        
Our comparisons use verified datasheet specifications to create side-by-side tables. Each comparison includes a verdict explaining when to choose each option based on your project requirements.