FT232RL replacement: the FT232RNL, CP2102N, CH340 and CY7C65213 crosses compared (2026)
FT232RL replacement: the FT232RNL, CP2102N, CH340 and CY7C65213 crosses compared
The FTDI FT232RL USB-to-UART bridge is at end-of-life, with a last-time-buy that passed on 1 June 2024 and distribution now listing it as obsolete. The crosses engineers cross-shop are FTDI's own FT232RNL, the Infineon CY7C65213, the Silicon Labs CP2102N, and the low-cost WCH CH340. The one fact that separates them is the host driver and USB VID/PID stack: the FT232RNL keeps FTDI's driver and identifiers, and every cross-vendor part changes them. That is a host-side and firmware change, not just a footprint swap. Editorially independent, from public sources only, and no vendor pays for a verdict; suggested candidates to validate in your own design, not drop-in equivalents.
Status // The part in question
Lifecycle status
FTDI's R-series end-of-life notice places the FT232RL at end-of-life with a last-time-buy date of 1 June 2024, gives the reason as discontinuation at the foundry (FTDI cites legacy silicon technology and a wafer-supplier price increase), and names the FT232RNL as the replacement. Distribution has caught up: DigiKey lists the FT232RL as obsolete and no longer manufactured, with the FT232RNL as the manufacturer-recommended substitute. The FT232RQ (the QFN-32 sibling of the same R generation) carries the same status.
Buying remaining stock only defers the design work, it does not remove it. Sequence any remaining last-time-buy against the design-in of one named cross, and budget a requalification regardless of which cross you pick.
Current stock, broker availability and any remaining last-time-buy window are dated data for the email, not this page.
Candidates // Why these
The candidate set
The four active crosses engineers actually search for, each with the fit-catch to validate, plus two references named below to redirect a bad cross:
Catch: a requalification, not a relabel. FTDI's named replacement, which FTDI calls drop-in pin-compatible in nearly 100% of designs, keeping the FTDI driver and VID/PID. It is the lowest-friction cross. But it is a different silicon revision (R rev C, RN rev B) with its own errata (TN_183) and migration note (AN_560).
Catch: pin match, new driver. Infineon documents the FT232R replacement and the pins match, but the USB VID/PID and host driver change, plus documented hardware differences (pin 28 no-connect, pin 16 1.8V vs 3.0-3.6V, different decoupling cap).
Catch: a board redesign. A strong, active, mainstream cross, but a QFN-28 with a different pinout, its own VCP driver, VID/PID and GPIO scheme. New footprint, new driver, new host identifiers.
Catch: a maker-grade profile. Active and widely used, but a different package and pinout, the WCH driver, and a supply, documentation, traceability and driver history a professional design must weigh against unit cost.
Two references, named to redirect: the Prolific PL-2303GC is a live cross only in its current generation (the earlier HXA/TA is itself EOL and blocked on Windows 8 and later), and the FT232H (Hi-Speed, MPSSE) and FT231X/FT230X (different pinout) are not pin-compatible FT232RL crosses despite appearing in the search cluster.
Footprint // The driver is the tell
Same footprint, not the same driver
A footprint match confirms the part fits the board. It does not carry the host driver and USB VID/PID stack, and that is what breaks host software, provisioning and any code keyed to FTDI's identifiers or the D2XX API. Only two crosses keep the SSOP-28 footprint, and the driver changes on every cross-vendor part.
FT232R SSOP-28 reference · only two crosses keep the footprint · the driver changes on every cross-vendor part
Footprint is necessary, not sufficient. The host driver and USB VID/PID change on every cross-vendor part. Suggested candidates to validate in your own design, not drop-in equivalents.
Parametrics // Side by side
Comparison table
| FT232RL (obs.) | FT232RNL | CY7C65213 | CP2102N | CH340G | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vendor | FTDI | FTDI | Infineon | Silicon Labs | WCH |
| Lifecycle | Obsolete, LTB Jun 2024 | Active | Active | Active | Active |
| Driver / USB VID:PID | FTDI VCP/D2XX, 0x0403 | FTDI VCP/D2XX | Infineon, own VID:PID | SiLabs VCP, own VID:PID | WCH, own VID:PID |
| Pin-compatible | subject | Yes, per FTDI | Yes, per Infineon | No | No |
| Package | SSOP-28 | SSOP-28 | SSOP-28 / QFN-32 | QFN-28 | SOP-16 (varies) |
| Supply / VCCIO | 3.3 to 5.25V | 3.3 to 5.25V | 1.71 to 5.5V | 3.0 to 3.6V | 5V / 3.3V |
| Internal clock | Integrated | Integrated | Integrated | Integrated | External crystal on CH340G |
| Config EEPROM / GPIO | Internal EEPROM, CBUS | Internal EEPROM, CBUS | Own config scheme | Own GPIO scheme | Limited (EEPROM on CH340B) |
The load-bearing rows are the driver / USB VID:PID (the FT232RNL keeps FTDI's; every cross-vendor part changes it) and pin-compatibility (only the FT232RNL and CY7C65213 match the SSOP-28 pinout; the CP2102N and CH340 are a board redesign). Lifecycle and electrical figures are vendor/distributor-reported, not independently audited.
FAQ // Frequently asked
Frequently asked questions
Is the FT232RL obsolete or still in production?
The FT232RL is end-of-life: its last-time-buy date of 1 June 2024 has passed, FTDI traces the discontinuation to the foundry and names the FT232RNL as the replacement, and DigiKey lists it as obsolete and no longer manufactured. It is still findable in distribution while last-time-buy stock lasts, but it is not a part to design in.
Are there counterfeit FT232RL chips?
Yes. The FT232R is one of the most cloned USB-to-UART parts, and re-marked or low-cost "FT232RL" modules are a documented counterfeit target. FTDI has twice shipped Windows drivers that acted on non-genuine chips: a 2014 driver reprogrammed a counterfeit chip's USB PID to 0x0000 and left it non-functional under Windows, and a 2016 driver made non-genuine chips inject a repeating "NON GENUINE DEVICE FOUND!" string into the serial data stream. Buy the end-of-life FT232RL only from FTDI-franchised distribution or a traceable authorized source; a counterfeit or clone is a separate requalification, not a like-for-like part.
What is the difference between the FT232RL and FT232RNL?
The FT232RNL is FTDI's replacement in the same SSOP-28 package, which FTDI calls drop-in pin-compatible in nearly 100% of designs, and it keeps FTDI's driver and USB identifiers so host software is undisturbed. The difference is the silicon: a different revision (R rev C, RN rev B) with an errata note (TN_183) and a migration note (AN_560). The one FTDI-stated hardware difference is the clock. The R needed an external crystal at 3.3V; the RN can use its internal oscillator.
Is the FT232RNL a drop-in replacement for the FT232RL?
Not as a guaranteed drop-in. FTDI describes it as drop-in pin-compatible in nearly 100% of designs and it keeps the FTDI driver, but treat it as a candidate to validate: it is a different silicon revision with an errata note (TN_183), and a design that clocked the FT232RL from an external 3.3V source is the FTDI-stated case to re-verify.
Can the CY7C65213 replace the FT232RL?
It is cross-referenced as a pin-compatible USB-UART bridge and Infineon documents the FT232R replacement. Because it is a different vendor, the USB VID/PID and host driver change, and Infineon's own comparison lists hardware differences (pin 28 oscillator output, the 1.8V regulated output on pin 16, a different decoupling capacitor), so validate host enumeration and the board before committing.
Do the FT232RL's CBUS pins and EEPROM settings carry over to the replacements?
Not automatically. The FT232RL keeps its USB VID/PID, serial number, and CBUS pin configuration in an internal EEPROM. Only the FT232RNL keeps FTDI's EEPROM and CBUS model; the CY7C65213, CP2102N and CH340 each use their own configuration and GPIO scheme, so any CBUS or EEPROM behavior your design relies on must be re-created and re-verified on the cross.
FT232RL vs CH340 or CP2102N, which to choose?
All three are USB-UART bridges, but the CH340 and CP2102N are a different package and pinout than the FT232RL and each uses its own vendor driver and USB identifiers, so both are a board redesign plus host-driver change, not a footprint swap. The CP2102N is the mainstream professional cross; the CH340 is the unit-cost option with a maker-grade support and traceability profile.
Can I replace the FT232R with the FT231X or FT230X?
Not as a pin match: the FT231X/FT230X are a different pinout than the FT232R, so it is a layout change, not a drop-in. FTDI's stated pin-to-pin replacement for the FT232RL is the FT232RNL.
Sources // Public, primary
Sources
- FTDI R-series end-of-life notice, LTB 1 June 2024 (PDF)
- FTDI FT232RNL product page
- FTDI AN_560, Migrating from FT2xxR to FT2xxRN (PDF)
- DigiKey FT232RL-REEL (obsolete, no longer manufactured)
- Infineon: Replacing FT232R with CY7C65213
- Silicon Labs CP2102N datasheet (PDF)
- WCH CH340 (LCSC product page, in production)
- Prolific PL-2303 Windows driver / EOL chip-version notice
- Ars Technica: Windows Update bricking counterfeit FTDI chips (2014)
- Hackaday: FTDI drivers break fake chips again (2016)
Part of // Featured in
Related reading
Editorially independent and from public sources only; lifecycle, package, driver and rating data is vendor-reported, not independently audited. Alternates are candidates to validate in your own design; confirm every detail with the manufacturer before committing.
About the author
Editorially independent and from public sources only; lifecycle, pin and rating data is vendor-reported, not independently audited. Alternates are candidates to validate in your own design. Confirm every detail with the manufacturer before committing.