•Highly Compatible to XP-G2
•Alternative to XP-G3 & XT-E LEDs with less colour separation
•Similar flux as XP-G2
Max Drive Current: 2Amp
Optically and mechanically compatible in most systems
Production in early Q3CY18LM-80 successor Q3CY18 Available now:
•Preliminary Datasheet
•Raysets
•Samples in certain CCTs
Key Takeaway
25% improvement in max drive current
25% improvement in Thermal Resistance
2.5% improvement in forward voltage reduction = 4% improvement in LPW
Improved colour separation performance over XPG3 and XTE
XLamp XHP35.2 LEDs Introduction
XLamp XHP35.2 (12V)
•Better Vf vs. Current and Temperature than XHP35
•Better Price Performance Roadmap
•Optically and Mechanically compatible in most systems
•Production in early Q3CY18
•LM-80 Status NOW (scales from XHP50.2)
•Available now:
•PreliminaryDatasheet
•Raysets
•Samples in certain CCTs
With better thermals (not present) and 6V (not clear yet).
4% efficacy increase? Half bin. Nothing to brag about. Looks like 3.2% comes from higher output and .8 from lower voltage.
Though the top bin of XHP35 HI was near-unobtanium. If we can actually get the top bin of XHP35.2, that’s not 4 but 11% improvement for some of us.
OOOHHH! The XP-G2 loving crowd should be VERY happy with this news! But, I wonder if this “improvement” is compared to the “older” XP-G2 or the “newer” XP-G2 which was already worse than the older ones. :person_facepalming:
Perhaps I’m wrong, but those look like flip-chip designs, no? I don’t see any bond wires and it looks like a rough phosphor “pour” over the entire surface.
It looks that way to me too. It looks like there are larger spaces between the dies in the XHP35.2 which further reduces the effective luminance for thrower applications.
I’m not sure about the XPG2HE. The phosphor is a strange color and it looks like it covers the whole package like other flip chip designs. But I can almost see bond wires in that picture, and the XPG2 designation makes me think it’s using an older technology. I’m interested to see this LED, but I somehow doubt it will throw better than the regular XPG2.
Yes, to me also it looks like XHP35.2 is flip chip with wider core gaps. :person_facepalming:
XHP50.2 is throwier than XHP50 in terms of cd/lm because of closer dies.
XHP70.2 is floodier than XHP70 in terms of cd/lm, but throwier in absolute cd/mm² because of higher output.
Here we have flip chip. With wider spacing. Not much more output due to increased efficiency. No output increase due to better thermals.
It certainly looks like a downgrade for our needs……but we’ll see.
Noticed one more thing…on the table says “XHP35.2 (12V)” and “XHP35”. In interpret that as saying that they don’t need to clarify voltage of XHP35 (because, as we know, it’s always 12V), but they need to do so for XHP35.2.
So probably there will be a 6V variant. Maybe 3V as well?….
Good points. I can imagine that it would be almost impossible to design it so the dies can be in series or in 2s2p config without making the space bigger between those dies.
So they would have to make 2 different ‘xhp35.2’ chips (where the dies are close together) to have xhp35.2’s with different Vf.
BTW, today I realized we don’t know the die sizes. They may be smaller which would explain price reduction and only small marginal gains. Just like Nichia 219D….
I believe the way the original xhp35 was built was the 4 dies were butted up to each other positive to negative to make then all in series.
I don’t see any way around having a tiny gap if you wanted it to be 6v and 12v.
Now if they were willing to make 2 versions, one 6v and one 12v, they could probably keep them close together. That would cause a ton of complications, though.
This is me guessing, I don’t really know how the base is constructed, etc… Maybe someone can chime in who knows more.