Cree XP-L V6 2C led, tested against XM-L2 T6 3C, edit23/7: I repeated the test and measured a dedomed XP-L

great info! thanks!

You have a link to a supplier of these new XP-L emitters ?

mine were from Illumn.com, they have 2A, 2C, 2D and 5B4 tint: http://www.illumn.com/leds-drivers-optics-mcpcbs.html?cat=124

where I got mine.

Great Tests! Just want to be sure - it's the V6, not the V5 XP-L? The graphs say V6 but the title and opening says V5. Actually both are available in a 2C tint from Illum, and I hope it's a V5.

The higher Vf makes sense, according to the CREE specs, but should still be lower than the XP-G2's. Also, peeking at 7.5A makes sense (I think) because of the smaller mount, maybe?

I got two of the V6's - one in a P60 pill and the other in a "slim" mini cheapo AA zoomie with a BLF15DD driver, copper pill top press fit in... Wink

Great testing. Love your work Jos

Nice setup djozz and thanks for all the testing. I always use reference threads like these especially for voltages at different currents.

Incredible job djozz! Your crash-test threads are always so informative. :smiley:

XP-L and XM-L2 both have the exact same die size (2mm x 2mm) right?

Whoa, this has to be the most accurate, disciplined emitter testing ever done by a "hobbist". I bet if the engineers a Cree see this, they will be saying, "why didn't we think of that on a couple points.

I am not near anything like your level, but I agree about not needing to adjust to Match's (another great maverick) numbers. The T6 designation was used for everything at the time. Some vendors now keep good track of the chain of custody, which is such a great improvement.

A far as this statement:

The more measurements I do, the less certain I am if what I am measuring is true (Confucius? ). So I hope they make sense and are useful, . . .

I can only imagine that the more precise you get, the more you are aware of more little potential error inducing issues. All I can say, is that no one that I'm aware of, has ever implemented such disciplined, diligent emitter output testing.

Correct (most likely) or not, it is the best we have here at BLF and probably any other forum by far. Thank you.

Given the smaller footprint, I say your results are impressive on the side of the XP-L.

Thanks for the testing, it is a great resource!

Thanks for the tests, this is great work

I am very disappointing with the XP-L, i expected a much stronger showing especially below 1.5A. If you used an XM-L2 U2 i can imagine them being neck and neck, in fact it may start out at a higher lumens then the XP-L which makes no sense because the XP-L is supposed to have 200 lumens at 1W instead of approximately 140 lumens.

great test

Nothing in the preliminary or published data indicated the XP-L would be anything other than a XM-L2 die stuck onto a smaller substrate. Unrealistic expectations based on false assumptions do tend to result in disappointment... :)

200 lumens per watt, compared to a XM-L2 U2 under the same conditions does something like 194 lumens per watt. Unremarkable.

source?

Cree's very own 'Product Characterization Tool' thingie.

Awesome…shows the XP-L is slightly outperforming the XM-L2…wow!

So much light in a teeny little footprint…how sweet it that!

Those suppliers on the XP-E/G type sinkpads better gear up :stuck_out_tongue:

of it's lower vf - meaning that a Liion for power the XM-L2 will produce full brightness for longer as the voltage drops, especially at high amps.

I think they’re rather slightly less efficient at the current levels we’re interested in. (3-6A)

The XP-L does have a higher lumen output but at a higher Vf. That is a big obstacle when trying to direct drive these LED’s.

But the small die size is a clear advantage, I can’t wait for super throwers using this LED. (TN31 or TK61 + XP-L at 5-6A)

Thanks for the tests djozz!