TTL JK flip-flop 7476 timing: Is the clock-to-output propagation delay the same as the asynchronous set/reset to output delay?

Introduction / Context:
Flip-flops often provide both clocked inputs and asynchronous set/reset inputs. Internal signal paths for these controls differ, so their propagation delays to Q are not the same. This is true in classic TTL parts like the 7476 JK flip-flop.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Clocked path: master–slave stages with defined tPLH/tPHL.
• Async path: direct set/reset transistors that bypass normal clocked latching.
• Different internal paths imply different timing.

Concept / Approach:
Asynchronous controls are designed for immediate override of state, often with shorter or otherwise different delays than clocked transitions. Designers must consult separate datasheet specs for clock-to-Q and set/reset-to-Q to ensure timing is honored for both control methods.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Identify two independent timing specs: tpd(clock→Q) and tpd(S/R→Q).Note that the async path bypasses the clocked datapath.Conclude they are not equal and must be checked separately.

Verification / Alternative check:
Datasheets list separate numeric ranges for these delays; bench tests confirm different response times to clock versus set/reset.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Yes” and conditional equality statements overlook distinct internal transistor networks.

Common Pitfalls:
Treating async set/reset like synchronous inputs in timing analysis; they can create race conditions if not properly synchronized to the clock domain.

Final Answer:
no