How to choose custom IC design tools
Massimo Sivilotti, Tanner Research
(01/16/2006 9:00 AM EST)
EE Times
A versatile EDA engineering design environment is comprised of that set of existing and emerging tools which meet a company's functionality demands and financial constraints. Assembling such a design environment is the process of optimizing the conflicting needs and constraints within the company, while also addressing adjacent concerns such as internationalization, communication, workflow, and security. At least that's the case in a perfect world.
Unfortunately, legacy issues more than optimizations often drive the selection of design tools — prior experience, tool familiarity, established design flows, and vendor name recognition. Also unfortunately, design tools have long been considered a stand-alone capital asset, independently purchased by engineering, and administered and maintained outside of the company's IT infrastructure. Classic IT metrics such as return on investment (ROI), total cost of ownership (TCO), and price/performance tradeoff have rarely been applied to the purchase and deployment of EDA CAD tools.
That situation is changing. Although engineering productivity still sits at the center of tool purchasing decisions, evaluating the true costs of a design environment now presents a more complex problem than simply looking at the price of the individual tools. IT-type metrics are becoming increasingly important in the analysis of CAD tools as companies move to quantify the costs and benefits of make-versus-buy, in-housing, off-shoring, outsourcing, and the purchasing of intellectual property (IP).
(01/16/2006 9:00 AM EST)
EE Times
A versatile EDA engineering design environment is comprised of that set of existing and emerging tools which meet a company's functionality demands and financial constraints. Assembling such a design environment is the process of optimizing the conflicting needs and constraints within the company, while also addressing adjacent concerns such as internationalization, communication, workflow, and security. At least that's the case in a perfect world.
Unfortunately, legacy issues more than optimizations often drive the selection of design tools — prior experience, tool familiarity, established design flows, and vendor name recognition. Also unfortunately, design tools have long been considered a stand-alone capital asset, independently purchased by engineering, and administered and maintained outside of the company's IT infrastructure. Classic IT metrics such as return on investment (ROI), total cost of ownership (TCO), and price/performance tradeoff have rarely been applied to the purchase and deployment of EDA CAD tools.
That situation is changing. Although engineering productivity still sits at the center of tool purchasing decisions, evaluating the true costs of a design environment now presents a more complex problem than simply looking at the price of the individual tools. IT-type metrics are becoming increasingly important in the analysis of CAD tools as companies move to quantify the costs and benefits of make-versus-buy, in-housing, off-shoring, outsourcing, and the purchasing of intellectual property (IP).
To read the full article, click here
Related Semiconductor IP
- HBM4 PHY IP
- eFuse Controller IP
- Secure Storage Solution for OTP IP
- Ultra-Low-Power LPDDR3/LPDDR2/DDR3L Combo Subsystem
- MIPI D-PHY and FPD-Link (LVDS) Combinational Transmitter for TSMC 22nm ULP
Related Articles
- How to Design SmartNICs Using FPGAs to Increase Server Compute Capacity
- How to manage changing IP in an evolving SoC design
- It's Just a Jump to the Left, Right? Shift Left in IC Design Enablement
- How to Elevate RRAM and MRAM Design Experience to the Next Level
Latest Articles
- Making Strong Error-Correcting Codes Work Effectively for HBM in AI Inference
- Sensitivity-Aware Mixed-Precision Quantization for ReRAM-based Computing-in-Memory
- ElfCore: A 28nm Neural Processor Enabling Dynamic Structured Sparse Training and Online Self-Supervised Learning with Activity-Dependent Weight Update
- A 14ns-Latency 9Gb/s 0.44mm² 62pJ/b Short-Blocklength LDPC Decoder ASIC in 22FDX
- Pipeline Stage Resolved Timing Characterization of FPGA and ASIC Implementations of a RISC V Processor