( ESNUG 378 Item 5 ) -------------------------------------------- [10/03/01]
From: [ Rinse, Lather, Repeat ]
Subject: A Customer Benchmark Of Cadence CTGEN vs. Silicon Perspectives FE
Hi, John,
Keep me anonymous on this.
We were doing clock tree generation on a block: 400,000 gate block, 36,200
endpoints. Desired max skew of 200 ps, insertion delay of 4.5 ns, max
trans of 500 ns with a .18 micron process.
Cadence CTGEN's results: 466 ps skew, max trans of 490 ps, met the
insertion delay, took around 6 hours, 3498 buffers used.
Silicon Perspective First Encounter clock tree results: 162 ps skew, max
trans of 480 ps, met the insertion delay, took 7 minutes, 1820 buffers used.
Both tools were given the same buffers to use and same netlist, same
floorplan, etc....
Is it any wonder CTGEN is a piece of trash?
Oh yeah, and don't let people tell you that its because I don't know how to
run their tool. I have read the entire manual (hey, it's short) backwards
and forwards and feel I know all the possible help/constraints you can give
it.
- [ Rinse, Lather, Repeat ]
|
|
