( ESNUG 456 Item 11 ) ------------------------------------------- [07/17/06]
Subject: ( ESNUG 453 #2 ) "Mike and Atul don't know what we're doing!"
> Mike -- The physical verification product from Mojave is a good start.
> There's still a lot to do. They lack OPC, litho sim, critical area
> analysis (random defects), parametric variability, and a strategy that
> builds this into one flow. It can't be tacked on piecemeal.
From: John Lee <jolly=user domain=magma-da spot calm>
Hi, John, Mike got it wrong...
Actually, Magma has each of these pieces. OPC + litho sim is built into our
router, as shown at DAC last year. We acquired the litho simulator from a
company founded by Alfred Wong -- one of the best litho guys out there (look
for his text book on Amazon.com; many of our customers, and our competitors
are using his text!) CAA/CMP analysis is also part of our flow; not just
analysis, but like litho, we do prevention and correction. CAA/CMP are
important effects, but widely regarded as secondary to litho for 65 nm. We
also have a full SSTA solution, which allows us to handle random variations,
and deterministic (e.g.; litho, CMP) variations. This is crucial, since
traditional STA leaves too much performance on the table; variability
budgets that customers allocate for 65 nm seem unreasonable.
Each of these pieces is built into our place and route system, and where
appropriate for sign-off, into "Mojave". So we'll both tell you there's a
problem, but also prevent and correct it automatically for you. I'll
encourage our partners (major IDM's, fab's) to write in to Deepchip, to
give you more substance -- like when we announced Quartz DRC ("Mojave"),
we feel customer contribution means more than EDA-marketing-speak.
Note that the Samsung/Chartered/IBM foundry alliance did publically announce
that Magma's DFM has been certified for 65 nm.
> Atul -- Magma is currently #4 in OPC in a 2-horse race? They definitely
> have their work cut out for them. Are they attacking the OPC market or
> are they addressing the DFM in their design flow? From what I read now
> they are trying to go after the OPC market first. If it were up to me at
> Magma, I'd go after the whole DFM problem instead of only the OPC part.
No, Atul has it wrong. Our primary focus is a complete flow and strategy
that addresses pattern (deterministic) and random variability, from cell
design through detailed routing, through final sign-off. By nature we
have a full OPC engine (leveraging the Mojave engine), which customers have
asked us to put into a production OPC tool - but we're not "trying to go
after the OPC market first".
- John Lee
Magma Santa Clara, CA
Index
Next->Item
|
|
