Comparison of the Co-verification tools for SoC/ASIC

Discussion in 'Cadence' started by rajan, Feb 2, 2004.

  1. rajan

    rajan Guest

    Dear colleagues,

    I need to find out that which verification tool would be better
    (overall) for the (Co)-Verification of the SoC/ASIC. We are thinking
    of making comparison between Seamless and Quickturn/Cadence product
    i.e. Cobalt.

    I know Cobalt has certain benefits such as: faster speed, Higher
    capacity.

    But still I need to know the following:

    - complexity in setting-up the environment (Seamless&Specman both)
    - User friendly
    - Nature of the results (% wrong values in result)
    - Effort required to make the environment working for simulation
    - Whether valid for synchronous designs only or more
    - Debug capability


    I will really appreciate help from the gurus of the
    design/verification community.


    Best regards,
    rajan
     
    rajan, Feb 2, 2004
    #1
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Similar Threads

  1. what must be associated in verilog file with LEF when imported in the SOC ENCOUNTER?

  2. Bangalore-based ASIC/CAD Tech Lead, Parasitic Extraction

  3. Verification for a big chip???

  4. Cadence verification tools history

  5. What do these two tools used in?? (1st Encounter / Soc Encounter)

  6. soc encounter keeps increasing the density

  7. SKILL code to submit the Assura verification runs in queue

  8. A comparison among VSS Remote Access Tools including SourceOffSite, SourceAnyWhere and VSS Remoting

Loading...