Compatibility between P3448-0000 SOM and P3448-0002 SOM Variants


We are designing a system that will have a custom carrier board for the Jetson Nano.
Due to current availability, and for the initial prototype testing we were considering using the P3448-0000 variant of the SOM in our custom carrier board.
While the document linked below details that P3448-0002 SOM Variant can be used with the P3449 carrier board, it does not specify whether the P3448-0000 SOM Variant can be used with a custom carrier board that does not have an EEPROM ID.

Therefore, provided that for testing the different storage options are not an issue, is it possible to use the P3448-0000 SOM Variant in a custom carrier board with no EEPROM ID.
Any help into this matter would be greatly appreciated.



P3448-0000 is not supported for custom board. Please use p3448-0002 SOM for custom board.

If you want to evaluate some application on nano, you can use P3448-0000 on devkit.

1 Like

Hi WayneWWW,

Thanks for your reply.
But as detailed in the document above an EEPROM ID is not requited for our custom Carrier board if we are using the p3448-0002 SOM variant right ?

Yes, EEPROM ID to your custom board is not required.

But the eeprom to the module is still required.

Sorry I’m a bit confused here. So if we have don’t have an EEPROM in our custom board, will the p3448-0002 SOM variant not work in our system

There are two eeprom on devkit case. One is on SOM, another one is on custom board.

sudo i2cdump -y 2 0x50 β†’ SOM eeprom
sudo i2cdump -y 2 0x57 β†’ carrier board eeprom

They are sharing same i2c bus but different address. There is no need for custom board eeprom. But the eeprom on SOM is needed. You cannot just totally disable that i2c from device tree.

Hi WayneWWW,

Thanks for the clarification here, much appreciated.

This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.