1. hFE (DC Current Gain) Test Conditions Differ NSVMUN5237T1G: 80 @ 5mA, 10V PDTC144WU,115: 60 @ 5mA, 5V Implication: The former is tested at a higher Vce, and hFE typically increases slightly with rising Vce. Under the same 5V Vce condition, the actual hFE difference between the two may be smaller than the nominal values suggest. However, the PDTC144WU,115 offers lower gain margin, so verification is needed to ensure it meets current amplification requirements under low‑voltage drive conditions. 2. Vce Saturation Voltage Test Conditions Differ NSVMUN5237T1G: 250mV @ 5mA base current PDTC144WU,115: 150mV @ 500µA base current Implication: The test conditions are significantly different, making direct comparison of saturation performance invalid. The PDTC144WU,115 shows a lower Vce(sat) at a much lower base current; it may perform better at the same actual operating point, but this must be assessed based on the actual drive current used in the circuit. 3. Collector Cut‑off Current (Iceo) NSVMUN5237T1G: 500nA (max) PDTC144WU,115: 1µA (max) Implication: The latter has slightly higher leakage current, but this is negligible in most switching or digital interface circuits. It should only be considered in high‑impedance analog sensing or ultra‑low‑power standby applications. 4. Qualification Standard Differences NSVMUN5237T1G: AEC‑Q101 PDTC144WU,115: AEC‑Q100 Implication: Both are automotive‑grade, but AEC‑Q101 targets discrete semiconductors while AEC‑Q100 is for integrated circuits. In practice, both are qualified for automotive reliability, but if the customer explicitly requires AEC‑Q101, this should be noted. 5. Minor Power Dissipation Difference NSVMUN5237T1G: 202mW PDTC144WU,115: 200mW Implication: The difference is negligible; the two can be considered equivalent for practical thermal design purposes.