From: Ken Cantrell ([email protected])
Date: Mon May 14 2001 - 15:19:03 PDT
Do you have 3D-solvers yet? Or are still having the SI engineer put in
"typical" values on the interconnects? How about common and differential
mode emissions? Last I heard from one of your hitters on the east coast was
that you only had differential? Has that changed?
Have you ever used HyperLynx? If you haven't, you don't have the right to
comment on HyperLynx, or XTK, or XNS, or any vendor's software that you
haven't personally done a board with.
Please respond off-line from the SI list as I don't think I could take
another "unbiased point of view" from you on the list.
Beware of salesmen bearing gifts. Cadence makes as good a package as any,
and better than most, but that has little bearing on what you need for your
application. You need to pick one or more from the many qualified
simulation vendors. The list is long, the competition is, for lack of a
better word, brutal. So take the promises with a grain of salt, review the
packages yourself, and pick the one that best suites your needs.
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Carlos Moll
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 7:20 AM
To: David Instone; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] : SpecctraQuest v Hyperlynx
From a non-biased point of view...
If you were to compare your requirements related to bit pattern error
detection or ISI, comprehensive waveform editing capabilities, differential
support, coupling of connectors/package ball I/O's, mutli board and package
to board ,etc. system level simulations , then you should at a minimum be
looking at a comparison between SpecctraQuest and XTK, not Hyperlynx.
From a biased point of view...
If you use Capture and Allegro as your standardized flow, then the
SpecctraQuest integration to your flow will provide you with the most
powerful and comprehensive SI solution!!
If you need me to further elaborate on such differentiations and why , then
you can email me directly at [email protected]
Cadence Design Systems
At 10:15 AM 5/11/2001 +0100, David Instone wrote:
In addition to all the 'normal' things the above are used for, given
the need to simulate differential pcb traces and the connectors,drivers
and receivers associated with them at rates upto 4 gigabaud, which of
the above would you prefer to use?
I also want to be able to display the resulting eye pattern and/or
calculated the resulting DJ from Inter Symbol Interference (ISI).
Naturally I would want to be able to read in board designs (we use
Cadence/allegro for pcb layout and Orcad for schematics) and it would
be nice if it would run 'stand alone' on a Labtop while on-the-road.
Dave Instone. Compliance Engineer Storage Systems Development, MP24/22 Xyratex, Langstone Rd., Havant, Hampshire, P09 1SA, UK. Tel: +44 (0)23-92-496862 (direct line) Fax: +44 (0)23-92-496014 http://www.xyratex.com Tel: +44 (0)23-92-496000
**** To unsubscribe from si-list or si-list-digest: send e-mail to [email protected] 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 ****
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 21 2001 - 10:11:57 PDT