FPGA & adaptive SoC databook · online editionRev. 2026.10

5CGTD9 vs XC7K160T

A comparison of the Altera Cyclone V 5CGTD9 and the AMD Kintex-7 XC7K160T using the data from both vendors' selection guides.

Side-by-side specifications

5CGTD9XC7K160T
Vendor / familyAltera Cyclone VAMD Kintex-7
Logic (LUT4-equivalent)227,120162,240
LUTs as published113,560 ALMs101,400 LUT6
Vendor logic figure301,000 LE162,240 LC
DSP342 variable-precision DSP blocks600 DSP slices
Block RAM11.9 Mb11.4 Mb
Large RAM——
Max. user I/O560400
Transceivers12 × XCVR 6.144 Gb/s8 × GTX 12.5 Gb/s
Hard PCI ExpressGen2Gen2
Hard processorNoneNone
Process28 nm28 nm
Configuration memorySRAMSRAM
Packages53
Design toolAltera Quartus PrimeAMD Vivado

Highlighted values are higher. Logic is compared in LUT4 equivalents; see how FPGA vendors count logic.

Key differences

The 5CGTD9 has about 40% more logic capacity (227K vs 162K LUT4 equivalents).

They use different logic architectures: the 5CGTD9 is built from ALMs and the XC7K160T from LUT6, so the raw LUT counts (114K vs 101K) are not directly comparable.

For arithmetic, the XC7K160T has 600 DSP slices against 342 variable-precision DSP blocks on the 5CGTD9.

Both have transceivers: 12 at up to 6.144 Gb/s on the 5CGTD9 and 8 at up to 12.5 Gb/s on the XC7K160T.

The 5CGTD9 is designed with Altera Quartus Prime and the XC7K160T with AMD Vivado.

Full specifications

See the complete spec sheets with packages and grades: 5CGTD9 (Cyclone V) and XC7K160T (Kintex-7).