1. Qg (Gate Charge) and Ciss (Input Capacitance): The SPW11N80C3FKSA1 has a significantly higher Qg (85 nC) compared to the STW11NM80 (43.6 nC), and its Ciss is characterized at a higher test voltage (100V vs. 25V). At the same switching frequency, the Infineon device requires higher drive current and incurs greater switching losses, placing stricter demands on the drive circuit’s current capability. It is therefore less suitable for high-frequency topologies where efficiency is critical. 2. Vgs(th) (Gate Threshold Voltage) and Vgs(max): The SPW11N80C3FKSA1 has a lower Vgs(th) (3.9V) than the STW11NM80 (5V), making it easier to turn on but also more susceptible to noise-induced false triggering. Its Vgs(max) rating (±20V) is also lower than the ST device’s ±30V, offering reduced gate voltage margin and slightly higher reliability risk in harsh environments with voltage spikes. 3. Technology Platform and Dynamic Performance: ST’s MDmesh™ typically emphasizes low Qg and fast switching, while Infineon’s CoolMOS™ C3 series adopts a different optimization between Rds(on) and charge (here reflected in a slightly higher Rds(on) but significantly increased Qg). This highlights a fundamental difference in silicon technology and application focus: the ST part leans toward switching performance, whereas the Infineon device may prioritize cost and conduction characteristics. 4. Rds(on) Test Conditions: Both devices have similar nominal Rds(on), but they are tested at different drain currents (SPW11N80C3FKSA1 @ 7.1A, STW11NM80 @ 5.5A). This suggests the Infineon part may maintain better conduction behavior at higher currents. However, to accurately compare conduction losses near the rated 11A, the full output characteristic curves should be referenced.