Is Eagleware's "GENESYS better than MWO and ADS?

genesys2003

Hi all I've recently went to Eagleware's homepage to find out about
"GENESYS" and "SPECTRA"(or something).
Downloaded some of the many video-tutorials they have, and I was so impressed! They have wizzards for almost anything:
filter-synthesis, oscillators, pll, matching...

I would like to hear comments from people who are familiar with this product
comparing with MWO2002 and ads2003.

regards,
StoppTidigare

genesys 2003

StoppTidigare,
I have been a long-time user of Genesys (since V3.3!) and must say since v 7.5 things really rock!

For the little guy that are designing lumped or distributed circuits I am sure you will be satisfied, and for the newbie the wizzards works really great!.

The other s/w you mentioned are really bigger and somewhat more complex....

I guess it really comes down to what you intend to do, and finally what user interface that feels right to you!

Just one minor point, the PCB-part have problems with copper pouring, it have improved and does almost work in the latest releases but you have to carefully check for flooding errors. It is the only major drawback

Try out Genesys, apply for a demoticket!

Cheers
/WD

mwo gensys

It is a close second to the other two. If you have moderate needs it is a good choice. I personally prefer the 7 and 6 versions because they were less complex for part time users. They were ASCII text based. If you remembered the commands you could type them in much faster than navigating the version 8 battle training obstical course of umpteen telescoping windows.

eagleware genesys

I have access to all three (Genesys 2003, MWO 2002 and ADS 2003A). I have not yet used simulation of digital communications in any of them. Only linear and non-linear analysis. But running the SPECTRASYS examples in Genesys 2003 was a real pleasure! Seems promising for future jobs I will do in SPECTRASYS.

I'm very fond of Genesys 2003 for it's nice and user friendly interface. But MWO 2002 has a very user friendly interface too and is about as easy to learn and use. MWO is generally very fast. Probably the fastest of them all.

For more complicated tasks I prefer ADS 2003A. I have the impression the ADS EM-simulator, Momentum, is somewhat more accurate than the corresponding EM-simulator of the other two. Especially above about 15 GHz frequency. My experience is comparing simulations with built circuits on Rogers Duroid.

However, ADS is somewhat more complicated to learn and use. Partly depending on it's strange user interface. But once used to it there's no problem.

I understand Genesys 2003 is the cheapest of the three and I judge it being very affordable.

As Genesys, MWO and ADS are the three dominating microwave simulators on the market, competition will force improvement on all of them with time.

I'd prefer always ADS due to its flexibilty by aid of build-in functions. Once is's learned or covered its menthality,the rest is very easy to develop of user.

For the others, I have used them for a short time but my first impression is that they have some lacks regarding to ADS.

For EM Simulation, the simulation results and measured are in a well harmony and therefore I like it..

For system simulations no program is comparable with ADS..

Regards

I have tried other tools before. I think ads is the best.

Symbolically defined devices (SDD) components in ADS make it very versatile for creating your own non-linear device models. If you get off the usual types of circuits that use pre-canned components, ADS has distinct advantages. Plus, ADS can be coupled to ICCAP to allow your models to be extracted/verified from measurement.

I have also used all three. <G>enesys has the best synthesis tools. M/W/O synthesis is okay and /\DS is pretty poor. For most non-system analysis, its a toss up between M/W/O and <G>enesys for ease of use. /\DS is best for complicated simulations but its roots in UNIX still show. Its clunky and cumbersome but it still has the most horse power. I heard rumor that programmers are leaving /\gilent and moving to /\WR. That should up the ante.

I think, the Gene$y$ and MWO approximately equal. The more pwerful syntesis in Gene$y$, the more friendly interface in MWO plus using the MWO as automation server is very useful. But the microstrip elements models in Gene$y$ more accurate. The MWO's microstrip models contains a quite large error, especially on the very high frequencies.

Best regards,
Kit-the-great

in RF and microwave simulation, @DS is the industry standard , and it is the most powerful and accurate, although MWO and EAGLE are not bad

but they are considered low cost suites for people whom cannot afford ADS

ADS is used for benshmarking other tools results

Use them in your way

I used them all. Gene$y$ is accurate and cheap, easy to use. AD$ is powerful but difficult for beginners. MWO is between the other two.
Gene$y$ and AD$ in very accurate in microstrip circuits. All of them are suitable for lumped circuits. In system level, AD$ is recommanded when using cosimulation with digital circuits.