RE: [SI-LIST] : SpectraQuest vs XTK

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Le, Dat (dle) (dle@sequent.com)
Date: Mon Mar 06 2000 - 10:57:39 PST


Hello Shannon,

        You'll always find tradeoff between these tools. I had a love/hate
relationship when it comes to Specctraquest tool.
I used to work for a group that using Sigxnoise/Spectraquest extensively to
extract netlist and run post- layout analysis. With
Sigxnoise/Specctraquest tool, you'll become very familiar with the many semi-
revisions or fix patch you might need to get the work done. However, it is
quite easy to use and quickly allows you to fireup simulation run for single
or whole group of nets. I found the visual presentation of the net(s)
quite handy in debugging complex board to board interconnect. There're some
limitations as far as if you want to run sweeps parameters beyond
fast/slow or odd/even xtalk mode cases. Sigxnoise has a nice feature to setup
custom stimulate source but then again you can't run xtalk analysis in v13.5
.
        Cadence support IBIS format but does a conversion to its own DML
modeling format. Yes, advance modeling documentation was rare but I think
it's improving especially with Merced modeling support. Package modeling
using Macromdeling syntax is not for the amateur, I once tried to convert a
multiline Spice package segment into DML syntax. Unfortunately, I gave up
after talking to the TME of the many syntax exceptions I need to follow,
plus it has to be done manually.
                
That's my 2c opinion.
        
Dat Le
Signal Integrity engineer
IBM-NumaQ
dat.le@sequent.com

        
                        

 
        
         
        

            
        
        
        
           

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Todd Westerhoff [SMTP:toddw@cadence.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 06, 2000 7:48 AM
> To: si-list@silab.eng.sun.com
> Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] : SpectraQuest vs XTK
>
> Hi all,
>
> No vendor comments, I promise.
>
> I'm just writing to point out that SPECCTRAQuest is compliant with IBIS
> 3.2, as of the 13.6.41 release.
> This IBIS 3.2 implementation has been successfully validated with third
> party models.
>
> Todd.
>
>
>
>
> At 04:31 PM 3/6/2000 +0900, you wrote:
> >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
> >****
>
>
> Todd Westerhoff
> Product Marketing Director | High Speed Systems Design | Performance
> Engineering
> Cadence Design Systems | 270 Billerica Road | Chelmsford, MA 01824
>
> ph: (978) 262-6327
> fx: (978) 446-6798
> email: toddw@cadence.com
> internal information website: http://www-ma.cadence.com/~toddw
>
> **** 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 - 11:35:19 PDT