THGBMUG6C1LBAIL and THGBMJG6C1LBAU7 share an 8GB nominal capacity and an e-MMC 5.1 interface, but their listed grade, operating temperature range and package height differ. A buyer should treat those differences as requirements to review before accepting a changed part number. Start with the exact devices, compare the documented limits, then ask engineering to resolve the remaining fit and system questions.
The Two Parts and Their Shared Features
These are separate ordering codes in KIOXIA's product brief. Record both complete manufacturer part numbers in the comparison. Use the THGBMUG6C1LBAIL model page to identify the specified code, then check the manufacturer documents for the technical review.
The shared capacity and interface provide a useful starting point. They explain why the parts might appear together during a sourcing discussion. They do not settle whether either device meets a particular board's requirements.
Define why the comparison is needed. For example, a supplier may propose the industrial part against a bill of materials, or BOM, that names the consumer part. Identify the changed requirements before deciding whether to review that proposal further.
List the specified part, proposed part and approval status separately. If the proposal names THGBMJG6C1LBAU7, preserve that exact code. A description such as “industrial 8GB eMMC” leaves the proposed device unclear.
With the exact pair identified, compare the documented fields against the requirement that prompted the review.
Verified Technical Differences
KIOXIA's e-MMC Managed Flash Product Brief, Rev. 2.0, lists the following values. The consumer part column refers to THGBMUG6C1LBAIL. The industrial part column refers to THGBMJG6C1LBAU7.
Field | Consumer Part | Industrial Part |
|---|---|---|
Product grade | Consumer | Industrial |
Nominal capacity | 8GB | 8GB |
e-MMC version | 5.1 | 5.1 |
Listed operating temperature | -25 to 85°C | -40 to 105°C, with a footnote |
Listed package dimensions | 11.5 × 13 × 0.8 mm | 11.5 × 13 × 1.0 mm |
Source: KIOXIA e-MMC Managed Flash Product Brief, Rev. 2.0, page 2. The industrial temperature entry has a separate footnote stating “Tc=115°C max.” Keep that note with the entry. Do not replace the listed operating range with a general 115°C rating.
The brief is a summary document. Its package dimensions do not provide a complete mechanical drawing or ball assignment. Its shared interface entry does not establish matching timing, boot settings or host support.
Record the source revision beside the table. If another document gives a different value, retain both references and resolve their scope. Do not silently select the value that makes a proposed change easier to accept.
Keep unanswered fields visible. The next stage maps the documented differences to purchasing requirements; it does not fill the missing specifications with assumptions.
The Impact on Purchasing Requirements
Translate each difference into a requirement on the actual purchase. A wider listed temperature range may matter when the application requires it. It does not, by itself, make a device an approved choice for every design.
Begin with the grade named in the BOM or purchasing specification. If the request names an exact part, quote that part separately from any proposed alternative. Ask the responsible engineer whether the proposal changes a controlled requirement. A buyer should not remove that distinction simply because both entries say 8GB.
Next, ask engineering to compare the required temperature conditions with the applicable detailed specifications. The brief does not define the temperature reference used by its Operating Temp column. Do not assume that an enclosure temperature and a device temperature limit have the same meaning.
Then address the package height. Both list a package length and width of 11.5 by 13 mm, but their listed heights differ. Ask the mechanical reviewer to check the proposed package against the applicable drawing and available clearance. An outline table is not a substitute for tolerance information.
Compare commercial offers after engineering identifies the acceptable part numbers and conditions. A lower quoted amount or earlier proposed shipment does not answer a mechanical or system question.
Use a requirement review table to assign the next action. This is a suggested purchasing worksheet, not a KIOXIA approval procedure.
Difference or Open Question | Review Action | Record Needed |
|---|---|---|
Consumer versus industrial grade | Confirm the grade required by the current application | BOM or purchasing specification and its revision |
Different listed temperature ranges | Confirm temperature definitions and applicable operating conditions | Detailed device specifications and the engineering requirement |
Different listed package heights | Check clearance, dimensions and tolerances | Applicable package drawings and mechanical review |
Electrical or host support not established | Identify the checks needed for the proposed device | Device specifications and the system review record |
The worksheet connects each question to evidence the reviewer can request. Keep a row open if the required document has not been obtained.
The Remaining Engineering Checks
The final review needs evidence beyond the product brief. Request the applicable detailed device specifications and package documents for both exact ordering codes. Engineering can then judge the proposed change against the system requirements.
Use the following sequence to keep the decision traceable:
Confirm the mechanical and connection details. Review the package drawing, tolerances, ball assignment and board requirements. Record what has been checked and what remains open.
Review electrical and system requirements. Check the applicable supplies, signal requirements, timing and supported host configuration. Identify any required boot or software review without assuming that the interface version answers it.
Record the disposition before purchase release. Retain the specified code, proposed code, evidence references and responsible approval. Keep an unresolved proposal distinct from an accepted BOM change.
For the record format, use the existing guide to recording approved alternatives in a BOM sourcing request. The approval entry should point to an actual decision. A copied catalog field is not that decision.
If a required document is missing, identify the affected question precisely. “Ball assignment not obtained” is more useful than “needs checking.” It tells the reviewer what evidence is needed and prevents an open issue from disappearing into a general note.
Frequently Asked Questions
Are These Two Parts Direct Replacements?
The product brief does not establish that conclusion. It shows shared capacity and interface fields alongside differences in grade, temperature entries and height. Use those facts to define a review, then obtain the detailed evidence needed for an application-specific decision.
Which Temperature Requirement Should Purchasing Record?
Record the requirement defined by the responsible engineering team, with its temperature reference and operating conditions. Preserve the industrial entry's separate Tc footnote. Do not turn a listed range into an ambient-temperature limit without the applicable specification.
Which Documents Resolve the Package Height Question?
Request the applicable package drawings for both exact ordering codes. Ask the mechanical reviewer to check dimensions, tolerances and clearance against the assembly requirements. The brief's listed length and width do not supply the ball assignment or board land pattern.
What Still Needs an Electrical or Host Review?
Engineering should identify the applicable supplies, signal requirements, timing and host support for the proposed device. Add any required boot or software checks to that review. The shared e-MMC 5.1 entry is a starting field, not a completed system assessment.
What Should Be Recorded Before Placing the Order?
Keep the specified code, proposed code, source revisions and approval decision together. Include the application or board scope and any conditions stated by the reviewer. If the proposed ordering code or requirement changes, revisit the affected checks before relying on the earlier decision.
Conclusion and Next Step
Use the documented differences to open specific review actions. Send the completed comparison and the remaining document requests to the responsible engineering team. Purchasing can then use the exact accepted ordering code and conditions, while keeping unresolved proposals separate from the approved requirement.