Just a quick comment on ICX : we've been using it for a couple years in
conjunction with our bulk router. a typical board of ours will have 2000
nets with a few hundred deemed critical. Overnight runs seem to be more than
enough time for synthesizing (routing) 100s of constrained nets.
I assume what you mean by conversion scripts to be converting the database
from another tool into the ICX database. We've seen conversions of good size
boards taking much less than an hour.
We feel that the above-stated times are a small price to pay for the risk
reduction the tool provides. Sure, a bulk router will be faster, but I
wouldn't trust it with my critical nets.
From: nsi04133-timmer [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Friday, August 27, 1999 6:51 AM
Subject: [SI-LIST] : MG Interconnectix
Since a few months we're working with
Mentor Graphics Interconnectix.
After a while we found out, that synthesizing
just a few critical nets, just as running conversion
scripts or processing rules, easily can take
To us it seems that the usage of Interconnectix,
is too time consuming, to benefit from it, as
we compare it's results to some new autorouters.
We're told that a lot of companies use Interconnectix
nowadays. What is your experience, is it worth
spending so much time or is it just usefull for
PWB's with a few critical tracks.
What is your opinion?
Thanks in advance,
**** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to
email@example.com. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE
si-list, for more help, put HELP. si-list archives are accessible at
**** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list, for more help, put HELP. si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu/si-list ****