EDA: Not Like Semiconductor Equipment
It was SEMICON China last week, and I've written a couple of posts about it this week. Talking about semiconductor manufacturing equipment a lot recently reminded me of a friend who used to work in the semiconductor equipment industry (and I did some consulting for him years ago). When I was having lunch with him, we got to discussing why EDA and semiconductor equipment sales processes are so different.
At first glance, there are a lot of parallels between semiconductor equipment and EDA. Most notably: many of the same customers, the same technology treadmill, and a small number of large suppliers. There is also not a huge amount of differentiation in the product offerings, at least in terms that are easily assessed by the customer. To a first approximation, all plasma etchers etch, and all Verilog simulators simulate Verilog. A better assessment requires deciding more precisely what you want to do, and then running detailed tests.
But there are also big differences, the two big ones being lead time and cost.
Related Semiconductor IP
- AES GCM IP Core
- High Speed Ethernet Quad 10G to 100G PCS
- High Speed Ethernet Gen-2 Quad 100G PCS IP
- High Speed Ethernet 4/2/1-Lane 100G PCS
- High Speed Ethernet 2/4/8-Lane 200G/400G PCS
Related Blogs
- What will EDA and chip design look like in the year 2020? Prognostications from the ICCAD panel
- Should More Semiconductor, EDA Startups Look to Kickstarter?
- Special Report: Buying And Selling EDA Companies
- When Is a Subsystem Not Like an IP?
Latest Blogs
- Why Choose Hard IP for Embedded FPGA in Aerospace and Defense Applications
- Migrating the CPU IP Development from MIPS to RISC-V Instruction Set Architecture
- Quintauris: Accelerating RISC-V Innovation for next-gen Hardware
- Say Goodbye to Limits and Hello to Freedom of Scalability in the MIPS P8700
- Why is Hard IP a Better Solution for Embedded FPGA (eFPGA) Technology?