>From reading both datasheets, the specs are so close, if not identical, they are the same part. Even the pinout is the same ! So use the LM4871.
Cutting the top off of one, and looking at the guts, may not reveal anything. Chip makers periodically change the mask set of all ICs, to keep up with the current processes, that they have on the line. I had a supervisor, once, who worked for a semi house. He said they changed mask sets at least once a year. And this is for old established parts. A LM358, today, won't look like one made in 2003, and both different from one made in 1983. They can only keep so many lines, and the wafers just get bigger. On Sunday, November 2, 2014 3:51:31 PM UTC-8, Dekatron42 wrote: > > Why not ask TI directly? Anyone here who can do that? > > /Martin > > On Thursday, 30 October 2014 19:49:35 UTC+1, jrehwin wrote: >> >> > The two parts look nearly identical from the datasheets. Since it was >> common to simply add an application diagram to an existing datasheet >> instead of creating a new part number, the LM9022 was probably a way to use >> LM4871s that failed some of the audio amplifier specs that would be >> critical to an audio aplication but would be of no concern for driving a >> VFD. >> > >> > I have 200 of the LM9022s, I'll get some of the LM4871s and compare >> them. >> >> I'm tempted to get one of each and have a friend decap and examine them. >> >> - John >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "neonixie-l" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/e1a6f551-721d-4792-9da5-3fba18a0072a%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
