Cool.
Just hoping XHP35.2 is not a flip chip………

ADDED:
BTW, XHP35.2 was my wish for this year.

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.

Good old xp-g2 is back?

Looking foreward to more info on that improved xp-g2. Still even like the old ones.

They should make Xp-g2 HI, i hope

Good news. Waiting for someone to test these new led.

But still no any improvement from MT-G2 until now.

Hope XHP70.2 HI…

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.

XHP35.2

XPG2 HE

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.

gchart wrote:

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.

Finally there is something new.
Excited to see their performance.

Yes, to me also it looks like XHP35.2 is flip chip with wider core gaps.
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.

The XHP35.2 will be good for compact single-cell lights with high output simply because of higher efficiency.

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?….

Agro wrote:

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?….

JasonWW wrote:

Agro wrote:

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?….

I guess the only good thing about moving the dies apart is that you can run it at a lower voltage (like the 50 and 70).

It seems to me that I might be seeing two bond wires on the new XP-G2-HE.
Or it might as well be two random reflections

thijsco19 wrote:

JasonWW wrote:

Agro wrote:

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?….

I guess the only good thing about moving the dies apart is that you can run it at a lower voltage (like the 50 and 70).

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.

I used to assume these were unrelated changes.

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….

Agro wrote:

Why would 2s2p need larger spacing?

I used to assume these were unrelated changes.

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.

Thanks for the explanation.
I believe that XHP50.2 is actually manufactured in 2 variants. Am I correct?

Agro wrote:

Thanks for the explanation.
I believe that XHP50.2 is actually manufactured in 2 variants. Am I correct?

The 50, 50.2, 70 and 70.2 have 5 pads under the base (middle pad is just for heat transfer) so the mcpcb can alter the wiring.

The 35 only has 3 pads on the bottom with the middle pad for heat transfer.

Exactly Jason.
That is what I meant.

Agro. I didn’t say that with a 2s2p setup the dies couldn’t be together. I said that
I can imagine that it would be almost impossible to design it so that the dies can be either in series (12v) or in 2s2p setup (6v) without increasing the gap.

If they choose to make 2 separate versions both dies can be as close together as they are now. But that would probably not be very cost efficient.

Thank you guys, I understand it now.

Doesn’t seem like much progress in the XHP35.2 especially with the larger separation, which means possibly no XHP35.2 HI variant. I alwasy wonder what’s the purpose of the XHP35 HD when there are already XHP50.2 and XHP70.2 that are brighter and more efficient.

SKV89 wrote:

Doesn’t seem like much progress in the XHP35.2 especially with the larger separation, which means possibly no XHP35.2 HI variant. I alwasy wonder what’s the purpose of the XHP35 HD when there are already XHP50.2 and XHP70.2 that are brighter and more efficient.

It’s physically smaller.

The_Driver wrote:

SKV89 wrote:

Doesn’t seem like much progress in the XHP35.2 especially with the larger separation, which means possibly no XHP35.2 HI variant. I alwasy wonder what’s the purpose of the XHP35 HD when there are already XHP50.2 and XHP70.2 that are brighter and more efficient.

It’s physically smaller.

BTW, none of these leds are made for flashlights, they are more for street lights and commercial stuff.

JasonWW wrote:

SKV89 wrote:

I alwasy wonder what’s the purpose of the XHP35 HD when there are already XHP50.2 and XHP70.2 that are brighter and more efficient.

BTW, none of these leds are made for flashlights, they are more for street lights and commercial stuff.

I have a small 1×18650 Zebralight that uses the XHP50.2. I also have a larger 4×18650 light that uses the XHP70.2.

Those LEDs aren’t used much in budget lights, due to their 12v forward voltage (and thus requiring a boost driver or several cells in series), but they’re becoming popular for high-output flashlights.

The 50.2 and 70.2 are definitely used in budget flashlights. They can be 6v or 12v.

2 bond wires in, 2 bond wires out like:
N N
P P
N N
P P
?