Skip to main content
Graduate II
July 29, 2025
Solved

USART3 RX not accessible on STM32F413 48 pin variants?

  • July 29, 2025
  • 2 replies
  • 348 views

Am I seeing this right? According to the datasheet, the STM32F413xG/H only maps USART3_RX to PB11, PC5, PC11, and PD9. All four happen to not exist in the STM32F413CG/H variants with the UFQFPN48 package!

Bit weird this doesn't seem to be noted anywhere. I guess this 10 UART chip is really a 9.5 (or fewer?) UART chip in the 48 pin package?

 

Extra keywords: STM32F413C STM32F413CH

    This topic has been closed for replies.
    Best answer by Tesla DeLorean

    Consider 1-wire mode.

    Not sure if this model supports RX/TX pin swap mode.

    Debug/Telemetry might only need TX output.

    Frequently bond-out options on smaller packages can be less than optimal. 

    Some newer/smaller offerings bond some pins together. Check if there are other newer parts with more flexibility, or higher pin count but physically smaller choices.

    2 replies

    Graduate
    July 29, 2025

    That’s often the case with the smaller packages. They have the same silicon chip inside, but not all of the pins are bonded out.

    I don’t know how ST decide which peripherals to route to which gpio pins, or which gpio pins to exclude as packages get smaller, but they seem to end up with a fairly good compromise.

    I’d like to see more flexibility in mapping peripherals to external pins to simplify my pcb layouts. I don’t know if some of the other manufacturers have different solutions.

    liteyearAuthor
    Graduate II
    July 29, 2025

    Yes, true. I was thrown by TX being available but not RX! It seemed like a nasty gotcha, when there's no quick reference as to which peripherals can actually be used.

    In the end I pored through the 48 pin, 64 pin and 100 pin variants trying to figure out what I could use. Some uarts are not available at all on lower pin count variants, which is not too surprising. But others had tricky clashes that seemed a bit wicked to discover. Probably just an unfortunate coincidence of being a particularly high peripheral count device?

    To save others the trouble, here's what I found are usable (note I wasn't looking at CK as a first priority):

    • 48 pin: USART1 (with RTS/CTS), USART2 (with RTS/CTS but clashes with WKUP), UART5 and UART7.
    • 64 pin: USART1 (with RTS/CTS), USART2 (with RTS/CTS with alternate WKUP available), USART3 (with CK), UART5, USART6 and UART7.
    • 100 pin: USART1 (with RTS/CTS), USART2 (with RTS/CTS with alternate WKUP available), USART3 (with CK), UART4, UART5, USART6, UART7, UART8, UART9 and UART10.

    So a significant ramp up of 4 (ish), 6 and all 10 UARTs available.

    Graduate II
    July 29, 2025

    Consider 1-wire mode.

    Not sure if this model supports RX/TX pin swap mode.

    Debug/Telemetry might only need TX output.

    Frequently bond-out options on smaller packages can be less than optimal. 

    Some newer/smaller offerings bond some pins together. Check if there are other newer parts with more flexibility, or higher pin count but physically smaller choices.

    liteyearAuthor
    Graduate II
    July 29, 2025

    Oh yes, I forgot about single-wire mode! Yes, all 10 uarts support it. Good for half-duplex peripherals, which is a lot of them if they play ball.

    Reminder to self: it's the RX pin that's not used in that mode, so indeed that would make USART3 usable on the 48 pin variant!

    Good point on debug/telemetry. Also, standard GNSS receivers are a good example of the opposite - might only need RX input. But no, I don't believe this family supports TX/RX swap.

     

    PS. I've now gone through the rest of the pin allocation. Boy is that mux table lumpy! No alternative functions on PC13/14/15, and just about every important function on PB3. Makes the smaller pin count variants a real tough juggling act.

    Graduate II
    July 29, 2025

    PC13,14,15 are also in the low power domain, so can't source much current.

    Yes, the pin muxing has improved over the years, but can be frustrating and inconsistent.

    I can't use BGA / CSP packages, but can live with the small square lead-less ones for minimal dimension on the board. Typically in the 20, 28 and 32 pin form-factors, some of the newer smaller die families for larger FLASH/SRAM needs