Talk:Power MOSFET

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electrical engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electrical engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Electrical engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Electrical engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Electrical engineeringelectrical engineering articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[MOSFET#DMOS|DMOS]] The anchor (#DMOS) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Error?

The caption on the first picture claims that the two small surface-mount MOSFETS are each capable of switching 120 Amperes at 30 Volts. Could this have been a mistake? It seems more likely that the ratings would be the other way around, i.e. 30 Amperes at 120 Volts. Ilikefood (talk) 15:30, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that does look like an error. I'm going to switch the values. Nazli (talk) 16:48, 23 September 2008 (UTC)picture[reply]

120A 30V is a reasonable rating for a MOSFET in a D2PAK, eg from a very quick look the ST STB200NF04: 40V 120A 3.3 milliohm. However the comment on the picture's page does say 30V 120A. Adx (talk) 02:06, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I can see, ratings have been switched which seems incorrect, since 120V is a very rare voltage rating for a power MOSFET, while 30V is quite popular. Also, 120V and only 30A is a relatively low rating for a modern MOSFET, especially in so large a package. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.68.164.90 (talk) 23:27, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please fix the first few pictures .. fig 1 and others don't appear well in Explorer .. thanks 24.6.8.100 (talk) 00:16, 12 January 2009 (UTC)bnichols[reply]

Suggest merge

Over at 2N7000 there's a list of power MOSFET devices being discussed; seems logical to bring that here to give it context. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:42, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I thought "low-power MOSFET" was sort of the opposite of "power MOSFET". No? Dicklyon (talk) 18:53, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In my line of work, if I can lift it unassisted, it's low power. I thought the opposite of "power" was "small signal". Please, clarify the criteria for me. --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:06, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I said "sort of". Dicklyon (talk) 19:08, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So what's the dividing line? Andy Dingley says 200 mA is small signal. Is this written down somewhere or am I going to have to run every device past the Cabal for approval? --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:54, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did a search and did find a couple of parts in TO-92 packages called "power mosfet" by their manufacturers; probably because they were designed for power, and also available in the heat-sinked Ipak package. But I don't find the 2N7000 called a power mosfet anywhere. Do you? Dicklyon (talk) 20:25, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This supplier calls it a "Voltage controlled small signal switch", and that its applications include "power MOSFET gate drivers"; so mention it here if you like, but don't merge it here. Dicklyon (talk) 20:30, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese data sheets are a little less authoritative than "for dummies" books, but this is the best we can do on a Sunday afternoon. --Wtshymanski (talk) 20:33, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I forgot how xenophobic you are. You can find the same line at a zillion other sites, including Fairchild's, which I think is where they copied all that stuff from. Dicklyon (talk) 21:28, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

W, are you serious about keeping this stupid merge request open? Why not just admit that it was just another misguided and failed attempt to get rid of the 2N7000 article, and take your tags away? Dicklyon (talk) 21:32, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm serious. The present state of the 2N7000 article is a grab bag of parts with no explanation of why this is supposed to be significant. At least merging it with MOSFET would give it some context for the unwary reader who hasn't been teethed on solder. Chinese data sheets are often badly translated into English, is my actual concern. But of course we don't need to assume good faith any more, because we don't agree with my edits now, do we? --Wtshymanski (talk) 21:41, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, we don't. And we don't. Dicklyon (talk) 21:47, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing no reason to suspect that anyone will support this, I'm removing the tag again. Dicklyon (talk) 22:05, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest replace

I will replace them IRLZ24N with FDL100N50F which has the highest dissipated power 2500W from the market for TO262 case. This is representative example of power MOSFET. In second place after power is more MOSFETs with 1890W power dissipation.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Radud55 (talk • contribs) 14:27, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

§ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Radud55 (talk • contribs) 14:06, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]