Chip vs Chip

nRF5340 vs CC2642R

<\/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 nRF5340 and CC2642R BLE SoCs.

nRF5340 vs CC2642R: Nordic's BLE 5.3 Dual-Core Platform vs TI's Autonomous-RF BLE Specialist

The nRF5340 and CC2642R are professional-grade BLE SoCs targeting demanding IoT applications from different architectural generations. Nordic's nRF5340 maximizes protocol capability — BLE 5.3, LC3 codec and Auracast." data-category="LE Audio">LE Audio, Thread, USB, and dual-core isolation. Texas Instruments' CC2642R prioritizes BLE power efficiency through an autonomous RF core achieving industry-leading radio power figures for pure BLE industrial deployments.


Overview

nRF5340 — dual 128/64 MHz Arm Cortex-M33 cores, 1.25 MB Flash, 576 KB RAM, BLE 5.3 + 802.15.4, USB 2.0, PSA Level 2 TrustZone.

CC2642R (Texas Instruments) — 48 MHz Arm Cortex-M4F application core plus an autonomous Cortex-M0 RF core, 352 KB Flash, 256 KB RAM, BLE 5.0. The autonomous RF core executes all BLE MAC and PHY operations completely independently — the application M4F is never interrupted by radio events, enabling both superior timing determinism and industry-leading BLE radio power efficiency.


Key Differences

  • BLE version: nRF5340 supports BLE 5.3 — LE Audio isochronous channels, Advertising">Direction Finding, extended advertising, PAwR, Connection Subrating. CC2642R supports BLE 5.0 — Coded PHY and 2M PHY available but all BLE 5.1–5.3 advanced features absent.
  • RF core: CC2642R's autonomous M0 RF core achieves BLE TX at 6.1 mA and RX at 5.9 mA at 0 dBm — among the lowest of any BLE SoC. nRF5340's network M33 achieves comparable but slightly higher active radio current.
  • Sleep current: CC2642R achieves approximately 0.85 µA standby vs nRF5340's approximately 2–3 µA — TI's meaningful sleep power advantage for multi-year primary-cell deployments.
  • Flash: nRF5340 has 1.25 MB vs CC2642R's 352 KB — critical for BLE 5.3 stack, RTOS, and dual-bank OTA coexisting comfortably.
  • Multi-protocol: nRF5340 supports BLE 5.3 + 802.15.4 concurrently; CC2642R is BLE-only.
  • USB: nRF5340 has USB 2.0 FS; CC2642R has no USB.
  • LE Audio: nRF5340 supports isochronous channels with Nordic's mature LC3, BAP, CAP, and MCP stack; CC2642R's BLE 5.0 cannot support LE Audio profiles.
  • RAM: nRF5340 has 576 KB vs CC2642R's 256 KB — nRF5340 supports more complex multi-stack RTOS-based applications.

Use Cases

When nRF5340 Excels

  • LE Audio earbuds, hearing aids, and broadcast audio leveraging BLE 5.3 isochronous channels and Nordic's mature LC3/BAP/CAP stack.
  • Thread gateway accessories needing concurrent BLE 5.3 commissioning and Thread mesh with dual-core isolation.
  • USB + BLE devices where USB HID, CDC, or DFU runs alongside BLE.
  • Large OTA-capable firmware: 1.25 MB accommodates BLE stack, bootloader, and complex application with dual-bank update buffer.

When CC2642R Excels

  • Industrial BLE sensors on primary cells targeting 5–10 year battery life — the 0.85 µA sleep current saves meaningful battery capacity versus nRF5340 over multi-year deployment.
  • TI SimpleLink ecosystem integration with existing TI-RTOS and Code Composer Studio toolchains.
  • Dense BLE networks where the RF core's autonomous scheduling reduces latency jitter in time-critical BLE connection events.
  • Industrial safety certifications where TI's IEC 62443 documentation supports multi-decade product certification cycles.

Verdict

The nRF5340 is the broader, more capable platform — LE Audio, BLE 5.3 features, Thread, USB, larger Flash, and dual-core PSA security make it right for complex multi-protocol or audio products. The CC2642R wins specifically in pure BLE power efficiency (especially sleep current) and TI-ecosystem industrial designs where the autonomous RF core's deterministic scheduling is a genuine architectural advantage. For a BLE-only industrial sensor on primary batteries with a decade-long deployment horizon, the CC2642R remains competitive despite the BLE spec gap. Engineers transitioning from CC2642R to nRF5340 should plan for a BLE stack migration from SimpleLink SDK to nRF Connect SDK — a non-trivial effort, but one that unlocks LE Audio, BLE 5.3 advanced features, and access to Nordic's broader community support going forward.

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.