PlasticDoc
Active Member
Since the 3e Audio amplifier is the TPA325x PFFB variant, the relevant papers for further investigation are:Worth resurfacing this 3251 vs 3255 comparison
if you don't see yourself pushing serious power (either for high volume or insensitive speakers), I would choose xx51 for providing slightly better performance for most typical listening ranges. I concede the point that both amplifiers are well in to inaudible THD range, so the real world difference is negligible. Still, the engineer within me would be happier knowing I have the more optimal chip for my use case.
- xx51 has slightly lower THD than xx55 up to around 5 watts
- 5 watts to 100 the chips perform similarly
- above 100 watts the xx51 starts to break up, the xx55 goes to over 200W before also breaking up
TI Application Report SLAA702 - July 2016, by Matthew Beardsworth
TI Application Report SLAA788A - September 2017, by Dan Kisling, Matthew Beardsworth
The original design started around 2014, so these TPA325x chips are now 10 years old !
From the TI papers, you can see that TI measurements and comparisons were (almost always) done using:
TPA3251, PVDD = 36 V, Fpwm = 600 kHz
TPA3255, PVDD = 51 V, Fpwm = 450 kHz
Neither the 3e Audio A5 (TPA3251) will be driven at 36V (it will be driven at higher voltage with slightly higher distortion), nor the 3e Audio A7 (TPA3255) will be driven at the higher 51V (it will most likely be driven at 48V with slightly lower distortion).
As a side note you may find that the SLAA702 paper (mostly by Matthew Beardsworth) has valuable tuning insights regarding IMD, Gain Compensation and Zobel network (to deal with speaker impedance issues); even there the TPA3255 looks better.
Over time, you may find that the A7 (TPA3255) is the better value.
Last edited: