1. On-Resistance (Rds(on)) and Test Conditions: STF26N60M2: 165mΩ @ 11A, 10V AOTF190A60L: 190mΩ @ 7.6A, 10V The AOTF190A60L not only has a higher nominal Rds(on) but is also rated at a lower test current, indicating its conduction characteristics are likely inferior to the ST part. Under the same actual operating current (especially near 20A), the conduction loss (P=I²Rds(on)) of the AOTF190A60L will be significantly greater, leading to higher temperature rise and potentially reduced system efficiency. 2. Switching Performance and Gate Characteristics: The AOTF190A60L provides full switching parameters (Qg=34nC, Ciss=1935pF) and is based on the aMOS5™ platform, typically optimized for a balance between switching speed and losses. The STF26N60M2 (from the MDmesh™ M2 series) does not publish this data, but the series is known for low gate charge (Qg) and excellent switching performance. In high-speed switching applications (e.g., high-frequency PWM), their dynamic performance may differ. The AOTF190A60L's moderate Qg value implies gentler drive requirements, while the ST part may offer lower switching losses. Substitution requires verification of temperature rise and efficiency at the specific switching frequency. 3. Maximum Gate-Source Voltage (Vgs(max)): STF26N60M2: ±25V AOTF190A60L: ±20V The AOTF190A60L has a smaller tolerance margin for gate overvoltage. In environments with significant voltage spikes or noise on the drive circuitry, its gate reliability risk is somewhat higher. It is essential to ensure the drive voltage remains stable within the safe operating range. 4. Cost: The AOTF190A60L price ($4.97) is approximately 42% higher than the STF26N60M2 ($3.50). Substituting with a part that offers no performance advantage and has higher conduction losses directly increases BOM cost. From a commercial standpoint, this substitution lacks justification unless driven by supply chain constraints.