RE: [SI-LIST] : XTK vs ICX

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: zanella, fabrizio (zanella_fabrizio@emc.com)
Date: Fri Jan 21 2000 - 05:29:46 PST


We own all 3 of the tools (Hyperlynx, XTK and ICX) here, and ICX definitely
is the best, and the one that's been implemented as the standard tool for
board level SI simulation.
With Hyperlynx you get what you paid for, it's good for simple analysis, not
nearly as accurate as ICX or XTK, the waveform viewer is primitive, and I
don't like the set up for entering your own nets. I think it should not be
compared to the other 2 tools.
XTK has the accuracy, but is much more complex and not nearly as user
friendly as ICX, learning curve is much longer, and the IBIS models need to
be converted into Quad format, which can add time and problems.
ICX takes in native IBIS models, supports the latest IBIS specs, is fast,
converts from routing tools easily, and the accuracy is very good.

Regards,
Fabrizio Zanella
Hardware Engineering
EMC Corporation
508-435-2075, x14645
FAX: 508-497-8027
fzanella@emc.com

                -----Original Message-----
                From: James F. Peterson
[mailto:james.f.peterson@honeywell.com]
                Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2000 4:09 PM
                To: si-list@silab.eng.sun.com
                Subject: RE: [SI-LIST] : XTK vs ICX

                I disagree with the statement below that ICX is hard to use
and slow to
                simulate. I believe it is very intuitive, and simulation
time for xtalk
                analysis, etc., is very reasonable. I've used them both and
believe ICX
                comes out on top. (But as Dennis Miller so aptly put it :
"It's just my
                opinion, I could be wrong".)

                Jim Peterson
                jfpeterson@space.honeywell.com
                Honeywell, Space Systems Division, M/S 934-5
                13350 US 19 N., Clearwater, FL, 34624
                727-539-2719

                -----Original Message-----
                From: Tadashi ARAI [mailto:arap@paso.fujitsu.co.jp]
                Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2000 1:10 PM
                To: si-list@silab.eng.sun.com
                Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] : XTK vs ICX

                Hi Tony,

                It may be important what type of methodology you use in your
design.

                Hyperlynx is easier to use than the others, but poor
functions such that
                small waveform viewer window gives limited information, not
IBIS v.3.x
                supported, etc.

                ICX is great, if you design your PCB layout yourself, with
rule-driven
                assistance router. Supporting IBIS v.3.x is good, but
multi-staged (or
                some advanced function of ) QUAD model is not supported as
far as I
                know.
                You will need many time initially to use ICX as whole degign
checker,
                because you must enter many parameters of rules database,
besides you
                must wait for a long time during the calculation.

                XTK is my favorite, but some more complex than the others.
You may need
                to take a time to learn XTK, but with a help of good
documents, you will
                soon make it use easier. Model support is great, IBIS 3.x is
of course.
                It is not so sofisticated like other new tools, but text
(ASCII) based
                databases are easy to manage than the other GUI oriented
tools in the
                case of such as you stack with uncertain trouble.

                My impressions are ...

                                Hyperlynx ICX XTK
                -------------- ------------------- -----------------
----------------
                Model Support **2** **3**
**4**
                (Native: IBIS 2.x IBIS 3.x Quad
native )
                (Board disc.: EBD
TOPSPEC )
        
(non-coupled
                                                                        line
only)
                (Converted: old-Quad IBIS
3.x )

                Ease of Use **5** **3**
**3**
                                (Very easy! But (Sofisticated.
(Need to learn.
                                simple can do only But bit complex.) But
is easy.)
                                simple.)

                Rule Checking **1** **5**
**3**
                                (You must do it (Great checking
(Check by the
                                manually.) functions.)
report output.
        
Difficult.)

                What-if **3** **3**
**4**
                "What is what-if is what you want to what-if function."(?)

                Multi-board **1** **3**
**4**
                                (Can it ?) (Need x-tra cost.)
(Need to learn.)

                Tool support **4** **4**
**3**
                "If your CAD was interfaced, it is enough. Isn't it ?"

                //// /// // / / / / / / / /
/
                /
                Tadashi Arai//Platform Developing Dept.,Desktop Prd Div.
Fujitsu Limited
                arap@paso.fujitsu.co.jp TEL:+81-42-370-7617 Inagi-shi,
Tokyo, Japan
                / / / / / / / / /
/ / // ///
                On Fri, 14 Jan 2000 08:16:15 -0500
                Mail from tony.scarangella@wwgsolutions.com described as
below:

>
>
> Dear Gentleman,
>
> My company is in the process of evaluation several Signal
Integrity Tools
                such
> as XTK, ICX and Hyperlynx.
> We eliminated Hyperlynx already. Our requirements are to
design a 19 slot
> chassis ( main card, backplane and several plug in cards).
We have several
> high
> speed (622Mbs) BLVDS buses, ethernet, gigabit, OC12, OC48,
128 MHz 64 bit
                DRAM
> buses (1Gig), PECL We are focusing on model support, easy
of use, rules
> checking, what-if, multi-board, tool support.
>
> I would be interested in any feedback as to your
experience in using these
> tools
> (Pros and Cons).
>
> Thanks
> Tony
>
>
>
> **** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to
                majordomo@silab.eng.sun.com.
> 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
> ****
>
>

                **** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to
                majordomo@silab.eng.sun.com. 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
                ****

                **** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to
majordomo@silab.eng.sun.com. 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
                ****

**** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to majordomo@silab.eng.sun.com. 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
****


About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 20 2000 - 11:34:46 PDT