Xilinx XC7VX1140T-2FLG1930I vs XC7VX690T-2FFG1761I FPGA Capacity and Package Comparison

ElecSuppliers Part Number ComparisonAug 23, 2026

XC7VX1140T-2FLG1930I and XC7VX690T-2FFG1761I are both high-end Virtex-7 XT FPGAs, but they target different levels of system complexity. The XC7VX1140T sits considerably higher in the Virtex-7 family, offering substantially more programmable logic, DSP resources, memory and I/O.

The comparison is particularly useful when an FPGA design is approaching the resource limits of XC7VX690T and a larger device is being considered.

A Major Step Up in FPGA Capacity

The most obvious difference between the two devices is logic capacity.

XC7VX690T provides approximately 693,120 logic cells, while XC7VX1140T provides approximately 1,162,240 logic cells.

This is a significant increase in programmable logic.

For a design that contains several independent processing engines, large communication pipelines or extensive hardware acceleration, the additional logic of XC7VX1140T can make it possible to consolidate functions that might otherwise require multiple devices.

The larger FPGA can also provide considerably more room for future design expansion.

DSP Resources for Parallel Processing

DSP capacity becomes increasingly important as FPGA applications move toward real-time mathematical processing.

XC7VX690T provides approximately 3,600 DSP slices, while XC7VX1140T provides approximately 4,560 DSP slices.

The additional DSP resources allow more multiplication, accumulation and filtering operations to be performed in parallel.

This can benefit applications involving radar, wireless communications, image processing, video processing and other workloads where dedicated hardware arithmetic is heavily utilized.

For a design that is already close to the DSP limit of XC7VX690T, XC7VX1140T offers substantially more room without changing to a completely different FPGA family.

More On-Chip Memory

Memory capacity is another important difference.

XC7VX690T provides approximately 52.9 Mb of block RAM, while XC7VX1140T provides approximately 68.5 Mb.

The additional memory can be allocated to FIFO buffers, lookup tables, packet storage, signal-processing pipelines and embedded processor systems.

This becomes especially useful when the FPGA must process several high-speed data streams simultaneously.

Instead of relying heavily on external memory for intermediate data, more information can remain inside the FPGA.

I/O and System Connectivity

The two devices also use different package sizes.

XC7VX690T-2FFG1761I uses an FFG1761 package, while XC7VX1140T-2FLG1930I uses a larger FLG1930 package.

The larger package provides additional connection capacity for complex FPGA systems.

This can be important when a design requires numerous external interfaces, memory connections, converters, communication links and control signals.

However, the different package sizes also mean that XC7VX1140T-2FLG1930I should not be viewed as a simple physical replacement for XC7VX690T-2FFG1761I.

A PCB designed for the FFG1761 package will require substantial hardware changes when moving to the FLG1930 package.

Package Selection Can Determine the PCB Architecture

The package difference is one of the biggest practical considerations in this comparison.

XC7VX690T-2FFG1761I is packaged in the FFG1761 family, whereas XC7VX1140T-2FLG1930I uses FLG1930.

The larger package of XC7VX1140T supports the substantially larger FPGA architecture, but it also affects PCB size, routing, power distribution and manufacturing requirements.

For a new board, the larger package can be planned into the design from the beginning.

For an existing XC7VX690T board, upgrading to XC7VX1140T is more likely to require a new PCB rather than a simple component substitution.

Same -2 Speed Grade

Both devices use the -2 speed grade.

This makes the comparison more focused on FPGA capacity and package architecture rather than speed-grade selection.

The same nominal speed grade does not mean that the two devices will produce identical timing results in a real design.

The larger device has a different internal architecture and routing environment, so the FPGA implementation should still be analyzed after migration.

Industrial Temperature Applications

Both devices use the I industrial temperature suffix.

This makes them suitable for applications where a wider operating temperature range is required.

The temperature classification therefore does not provide a major distinction between these two part numbers.

For industrial systems, the more important question is whether the larger FPGA capacity of XC7VX1140T is required by the application.

When XC7VX690T Is Enough

XC7VX690T remains a powerful FPGA and should not be replaced simply because XC7VX1140T provides more resources.

If the design has comfortable logic utilization, sufficient DSP capacity and adequate block RAM, XC7VX690T may provide a more efficient solution.

It can be especially attractive when the existing PCB, power system and FPGA firmware have already been optimized around the device.

Moving to XC7VX1140T makes more sense when the current FPGA has become a genuine resource limitation.

When XC7VX1140T Becomes Attractive

XC7VX1140T is particularly useful when an FPGA design has outgrown the XC7VX690T.

Typical reasons include:

Large hardware acceleration architectures

Multiple independent DSP pipelines

Large communication systems

High-throughput image processing

Complex video processing

Large embedded processing systems

Multi-channel data acquisition

The additional logic and memory can allow more functions to be integrated into one FPGA.

XC7VX1140T for Large FPGA Architectures

The XC7VX1140T is particularly suited to applications where FPGA capacity itself is a major design requirement.

A larger programmable fabric allows engineers to implement more parallel processing instead of relying on sequential processing.

This can improve throughput when the application can be effectively parallelized.

The larger device can also make it possible to combine several hardware functions that might otherwise be distributed across multiple FPGAs.

XC7VX690T for High-Performance Designs

XC7VX690T should not be considered a low-end alternative.

With hundreds of thousands of logic cells, thousands of DSP slices and tens of megabits of block RAM, it remains suitable for demanding FPGA applications.

For many systems, its resources are already more than sufficient.

If the design does not require the additional capacity of XC7VX1140T, XC7VX690T can avoid the additional PCB and system complexity associated with the larger FLG1930 package.

Can XC7VX690T Be Replaced by XC7VX1140T?

From a resource perspective, XC7VX1140T offers considerably more capacity.

However, the different package means this is not a straightforward drop-in replacement.

A migration would normally require a new PCB design or substantial board-level changes.

Power requirements, package routing, I/O assignments, configuration connections and high-speed interfaces all need to be redesigned or revalidated.

For a new hardware platform, however, XC7VX1140T can be an attractive upgrade path when additional FPGA capacity is required.

Can XC7VX1140T Be Reduced to XC7VX690T?

The reverse migration is more challenging because XC7VX690T has significantly fewer resources.

The first step is to determine how much of the XC7VX1140T device is actually being used.

If the design has low logic, DSP and memory utilization, migration may be possible.

If the design relies heavily on the additional capacity, reducing the FPGA size could require substantial architectural changes.

The PCB package difference also needs to be considered.

Which Device Fits a New Design?

For a new FPGA project, the decision should begin with resource requirements rather than package availability.

If the expected design fits comfortably within XC7VX690T, the smaller device may provide a more practical platform.

If the architecture requires substantially more logic, DSP or memory, XC7VX1140T can provide the necessary headroom.

The package should then be selected according to the required I/O count, routing complexity and board architecture.

XC7VX1140T-2FLG1930I vs XC7VX690T-2FFG1761I

The two devices represent different capacity levels within the Virtex-7 XT family.

XC7VX690T-2FFG1761I

Approximately 693,120 logic cells
Approximately 3,600 DSP slices
Approximately 52.9 Mb block RAM
FFG1761 package
-2 speed grade
Industrial temperature grade

XC7VX1140T-2FLG1930I

Approximately 1,162,240 logic cells
Approximately 4,560 DSP slices
Approximately 68.5 Mb block RAM
FLG1930 package
-2 speed grade
Industrial temperature grade

XC7VX1140T-2FLG1930I is the stronger option when maximum FPGA capacity is the priority. XC7VX690T-2FFG1761I is more appropriate when its resources are sufficient and a smaller package and simpler PCB architecture are preferred.

For existing hardware, the package difference is critical. For new designs, the choice should be driven by FPGA utilization, I/O requirements, DSP workload, memory needs and expected future expansion.