Re: [SI-LIST] : SpectraQuest vs XTK

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Tadashi ARAI (arap@paso.fujitsu.co.jp)
Date: Sun Mar 05 2000 - 23:31:57 PST


Hi Shannon,

I'm using both XTK for about 5 years and SPECCTRAQuest for 3 years.
>From my experience, I don't recommend to use SPECCTRAQuest.

However SPECCTRAQuest has good-looking GUI, for the complication of the
menus and the lacking of manuals and document, it is very difficult to
become skilled in the use of it.
Also it is not perfect to support some complex IBIS models, which were
converted to their unique device models (DML) by "ibis2signoise" utility.
It is hard to read or manage with DMLs, because there is no
understandable discription for them.
But there are some pros. on SPECCTRAQuest. The function of
back-/forward- annotation with Concept and Allegro will be useful. If
you had changed your design on Allegro, you can simulate to verify and
apply changes to your schematic with only a slight operation. (If you
have no trouble with modeling...)

To use XTK, you need to study some programming-like model-making. For
the help of good documentation, it is rather easy to understand. If you
came up against any trouble, you can investigate the text-based
databases to solve it.
XTK , by contrast, has no returnable function to schematic or layout
entry tools. You need to reflect your analysis result by manually.

There are some another solution (such as ICX) you may consider.

//// /// // / / / / / / / / / /
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 Sun, 5 Mar 2000 00:15:28 -0700
Mail from shannon@compatible.com described as below:

> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> As part of an acquisition requirement, we are changing our design tools. Our
> designs are high density, high speed digital 33Mhz to 1GHz. We are changing
> PCB layout to Allegro from Cadence. We are also changing schematic entry to
> either Cadence HDL or ViewLogic ViewDraw. The Cadence tool of choice for SI
> simulation seems to be SpectraQuest while ViewLogic's tool is XTK. I have
> heard positive reviews for XTK on this forum but never SpectraQuest. Has
> anyone out there successfully used the SpectraQuest tool? Can someone give me
> a comparison of the two tools and/or their capabilities? Can anyone speak to
> the specific advantages of XTK bundled with ViewLogic vs using XTK with
> Cadence HDL? Does anyone have statistics for the number of XTK seats vs
> SpectraQuest seats in the industry?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Shannon Roseman
> Senior Hardware Engineer
> Compatible Systems
>
> **** To unsubscribe from si-list or si-list-digest: send e-mail to majordomo@silab.eng.sun.com. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list or UNSUBSCRIBE si-list-digest, for more help, put HELP.
> si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> ****
>
>

**** To unsubscribe from si-list or si-list-digest: send e-mail to majordomo@silab.eng.sun.com. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list or UNSUBSCRIBE si-list-digest, 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 - 11:35:18 PDT