( ESNUG 461 Item 10 ) ------------------------------------------- [01/31/07]
Subject: ( ESNUG 457 #5 ) new DC-Topo correlates within 4% of Magma P&R
> Our 130 nm test design was 125 MHz with 7 clocks and 28 derived clocks.
> It had 164 IO's with 87 macros. The releases used: DC Ultra 2005.09 SP3
> (topo is only available on Ultra) & 2005.09 PhysOpt.
>
> DC with CWLM's DC with Topographical
>
> Timing Correlation 10.08% 6.02%
> Area Correlation 2.8% 1.4%
> Runtime (RTL to PG) 18.16 hr 17.7 hr
> Memory (DC+PhysOpt) 4.08 GB 4.14 GB
>
> Topo DC had better timing and area correlation compared to our manually
> created CWLM's; to our surprise it also had better area post-PhysOpt.
>
> - Jasper Lee
> Progate Group Corporation Taipei, Taiwan
From: Rajiv Sharma <rajsharm=user domain=cisco not balm>
Hi, John,
I would like to 2nd the good results that a few of your readers have
observed with DC-Topo. We did an eval focused on area and timing
correlation between DC-Topo synthesis and subsequent Magma P&R using
Texas Instruments 65 nm libs.
DC with DC with
no WLM 7LM WLM DC-Topo
--------- --------- ---------
post synthesis (WNS) 0 psec 0 psec -418 psec
Magma placement (WNS) -578 psec -559 psec -553 psec
post synthesis area 0.9 1.4 3.1
Magma placement area 3.2 3.2 3.2
DC synthesis runtime 8 hrs 34 hrs 17 hrs
versions: DC/DC-Topo v2006.06-SP1
Magma 2005.03.113.3075.5.ft-linux24_x86_64
Area prediction during synthesis stage is important to get early warning
for any die-size increase. Timing prediction is important to reduce the
long iterations to modify RTL to fix timing violations seen during P&R.
Our results showed a 2% correlation for area and 4% correlation for timing
using DC-Topo synthesis and Magma Blast Fusion.
- Rajiv Sharma
Cisco Systems, Inc. San Jose, CA
Index
Next->Item
|
|
