>From: "Bishop, Ron" <Ron_Bishop@mentorg.com>
>Subject: RE : [SI-LIST] : Need your comments in selection of SI simula
>Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 09:17:40 -0700
> Actually...Mentors tool for 'synthesis' of routes based on
>electrical rules (i.e. timing, over/under shoot, crosstalk, etc) in
>thier Interconnectix Interconnect Synthesis product.
> Take a look at www.mentorg.com/icx
>Ron Bishop- CST Specialist Phx Phone= (602) 224-2103
>2800 N. 44th St.; Suite 100 Pdx Phone= (503) 685-1992
>Phoenix, AZ. 85008 Fax= (602) 956-4228
> email- firstname.lastname@example.org
>Mentor Graphics- Interconnectix Business Unit
>"Don't Take Life So Seriously - It's Not Like It's Permanent."
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Weber Chuang [SMTP:WeberChuang@via.com.tw]
>> Sent: Monday, April 20, 1998 12:03 AM
>> To: si-list@silab.Eng.Sun.COM
>> Subject: RE : [SI-LIST] : Need your comments in selection of SI
>> Dear Allen,
>> We are also currently using QUAD/xtk, and Hspice as well, like what
>> Michael said, QUAD is mainly a post-layout analysis tool, you can't
>> combine it with your router automatically to do routing based on
>> electrical rule or class(at least I do not know how to, and I heard
>> one of my friends that Cadence can do this, Mentor has a toolkit
>> Board-500 that can do this, but the calculating engine seems to be
>> QUAD/xtk/xfx which is now merged by Viewlogic/Synopsys). But the
>> accuracy is good if you can build correct environment(module, stackup,
>> IBIS, connector...). We will have more correlation work done once we
>> the TDR and 10GHz scope next month.
>> To do SI analysis, you need to be pretty familiar with the S/W's
>> platform as well as transmission line theory and PC system architect(I
>> know you are PC system maker), only then can you fully understand what
>> you are doing and how to improve the SI issue as well as simulation
>> accuracy. There might be a long way to go.
>> For SSO noise, there is little that a system house can do, but you
>> focus on signal integrity as well as static timing analysis(QUAD has a
>> tool called MOTIVE that can accept the output of XTK, in the new
>> of Mentor's S/W, they have something alike(called TAU or what), I
>> know the status of Cadence, you may need to check it out, we develop
>> own in-house tool for this purpose with PERL and VBasic/excel).
>> By the way, good supporting is also a very important factor, as far
>> I know, the supporting FAE of QUAD/xtk in Taiwan has just joined
>> Taiwan in April, he knows QUAD/xtk somewhat, but it might take 2 or 3
>> months for him to get used to Mentor, Viewlogic/QUAD might need the
>> time to build up a new supporter though maybe not mature enough,
>> supporting people of Cadence is from PCB side(but really senior, he
>> my colleague while I was in Mentor), not from RD side(maybe they have
>> hired new staff now, you need to find out). I try not to stand in
>> of any side, and I hope it helps.
>> Best Regards
>> Weber Chuang(ChingFu Chuang)
>> SI Group Leader, System Team.
>> VIA Technologies, Inc.
>> Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
>> Very Innovative Architecture
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Michael Cohen [SMTP:email@example.com]
>> > Sent: Thursday, April 16, 1998 10:52 PM
>> > To: si-list@silab.Eng.Sun.COM
>> > Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] : Need your comments in selection of SI
>> > simula
>> > >> Dear sir:
>> > >>
>> > >> Currently, we are preparing to introduce the signal integrity
>> > CAD tool
>> > >> into our motherboard design flow. The two candidates are Quad
>> > and
>> > >> Mentor. Can you kindly give us your opinions about the
>> > of
>> > >> those two company such that we can make a proper selection.
>> > >>
>> > >> Best regards!
>> > >>
>> > >> Allen
>> > We currently use the Quad XTK toolset, but are seriously looking at
>> > using the
>> > Cadence SPECCTRAQuest toolset, as Quad XTK does not give us an
>> > adequate early,
>> > pre-route, SI solution. We will continue to use Quad XTK for
>> > post-route
>> > analysis.
>> > The key to any decision you make is what do you already have in
>> > for the
>> > rest of you CAD tools (schematic capture, board placement, board
>> > routing,
>> > etc.). If the majority of your tools are Cadence, then you should
>> > seriously
>> > investigate SPECCTRAQuest. If they are Mentor tools, stay in that
>> > line. If
>> > the tools are a hodgepodge of vendors, you should look into bringing
>> > them into
>> > one, either Cadence, Synopsys (Quad & ViewLogic are now owned by
>> > Synopsys), or
>> > Mentor. All these tools have their strenghts and weaknesses; the
>> > other key is
>> > to determine your company's needs and work from them. Don't make a
>> > rash
>> > judgement; bring them in, evaluate them, then make YOUR decision.
>> > Mike