Agile Design for Hardware, Part II
David Patterson and Borivoje NikoliÄ, UC Berkeley
EETimes (7/30/2015 07:00 AM EDT)
In the second of a three-part series, two Berkeley professors suggest its time to apply Agile design techniques to hardware.
We asked readers of Part I to guess the cost of a prototype run of 28 nm chips, as Agile development relies on a sequence of interim prototypes versus the One Big Tapeout of the traditional Waterfall process. Here are the results:
The surprisingly low manufacturing cost of prototype chips—one fifth the readers’ estimate—means Agile development is eminently affordable, even for academics. (See www.AgileSoC.com for more evidence.) It also calls into question the current high cost of designing SoCs using the Waterfall process. Having established Agile’s viability, based on our experience we propose four guidelines to lower development costs.
To read the full article, click here
Related Semiconductor IP
- Mesochronous Bridge for PCIe/CXL
- AI-native GPU
- OpenGMSL Verification IP
- OpenGMSL Leaf IP
- FlexGen Multi-Die Smart Network-on-Chip (NoC) IP
Related Articles
- Agile Design for Hardware, Part I
- How to design secure SoCs, Part II: Key Management
- LLMs for Secure Hardware Design and Related Problems: Opportunities and Challenges
- How to design secure SoCs, Part III: Secure Boot
Latest Articles
- FlexSpIM: An Event-Based Digital Compute-In-Memory Accelerator with Flexible Operand Resolution and Layer-Wise Hybrid Stationarity
- MeshKV: A Network-on-Chip KV Cache Fabric for Scalable Transformer Decoding Accelerators
- Analog Pin Directionality as an Exfiltration Attack Surface in Mixed-Signal ICs
- SIMT-Aware Lockstep Verification and Functional-Coverage Closure Methodology for an Open-Source RISC-V GPGPU: A UVM 1.2 Environment
- Efficient Hardware Information-Flow Tracking for Pre-Silicon Security Testing