Welcome to EDAboard.com

Welcome to our site! EDAboard.com is an international Electronics Discussion Forum focused on EDA software, circuits, schematics, books, theory, papers, asic, pld, 8051, DSP, Network, RF, Analog Design, PCB, Service Manuals... and a whole lot more! To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

cadence vs tanner L-edit

Status
Not open for further replies.

visualart

Advanced Member level 1
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Messages
467
Helped
28
Reputation
56
Reaction score
4
Trophy points
1,298
Activity points
3,333
run on the workstation, the cadence is the best
BUT, run on the PC, the Ledit is s strong tool
 

Sergiu_Q

Full Member level 3
Joined
Jan 14, 2003
Messages
186
Helped
6
Reputation
12
Reaction score
1
Trophy points
1,298
Location
Romania
Activity points
2,711
I have some question...how many of you use this 2 tools ?
why cadence is more better??
...................
my opinion
for industry we need the GDSII file and both of this tools do this (so no difference betwen this) , the rule file is more easy in L-edit , DRC is same for both but the time for this is more biger for both than calibre (I use calibre for DRC because for a full chip I need only 3-4 min ..with cadence will be 3-4 hours and with L-edit max 30 min ) ...so why is cadence so good ?..because is cadence offer this tools free for some university's and for some of you is a familiar tool ?....cadence offer a most complete tools for microelectronics design but that don't mean is the best .
in my opinion the best for DRC/LVS is Calibre , the powerfull simulator is Hspice and the best tool for layout is the tool who provide the file I need for factory and who offer a easy mode to draw my layout's at the smalest costs
 

z81203

Full Member level 5
Joined
Aug 1, 2001
Messages
308
Helped
5
Reputation
10
Reaction score
1
Trophy points
1,298
Activity points
2,356
i heard after cadence's virtuoso, laker is good layout edit tool.
 

khouly

Advanced Member level 5
Joined
Oct 20, 2003
Messages
2,368
Helped
461
Reputation
916
Reaction score
102
Trophy points
1,343
Location
EGYPT
Activity points
13,242
for analog simulation HSPICE and SPECTRE and ELDO are almost the same
but hspice is the indusrty standard

RF simulation the @DS comes in the frist place , then spectre-rf then ELDO-rf
hspice-rf is a new tool i donot know much about it

and i agree with Sergiu_Q caliber is the best in DRC and LVS
but may i ask which is the best parasitic extractor ?

khouly
 

sgperzoid

Member level 3
Joined
Mar 29, 2005
Messages
57
Helped
5
Reputation
10
Reaction score
1
Trophy points
1,288
Activity points
1,794
has anyone here tried RFDE?
it ADS in Cadence
I think this could be a very powerful simulation engine

anyone tried this?
 

khouly

Advanced Member level 5
Joined
Oct 20, 2003
Messages
2,368
Helped
461
Reputation
916
Reaction score
102
Trophy points
1,343
Location
EGYPT
Activity points
13,242
i have tried it , it is great , and gives u the capabilty to simulate the inductors with momentum in cadence layout , which is great
and the Harmonic balance engine is great

khouly
 

svu

Newbie level 3
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
3
Helped
1
Reputation
2
Reaction score
1
Trophy points
1,283
Activity points
1,348
I have some question...how many of you use this 2 tools ?
why cadence is more better??
----------------------
I am a layout guy, and I've worked with both L-Edit and Cadence. I personal think Cadence is a better tool, specially for DRC and LVS. Cadence's LVS debug program can point and zoom to the errors. In layout, I afraid the most a short from GND to power at the chip level, but with Cadence's debug program, I can find it less than 5 minutes. L-Edit can not do that. Hope this help.

Added after 6 seconds:

I have some question...how many of you use this 2 tools ?
why cadence is more better??
----------------------
I am a layout guy, and I've worked with both L-Edit and Cadence. I personal think Cadence is a better tool, specially for DRC and LVS. Cadence's LVS debug program can point and zoom to the errors. In layout, I afraid the most a short from GND to power at the chip level, but with Cadence's debug program, I can find it less than 5 minutes. L-Edit can not do that. Hope this help.
 

blueant

Member level 1
Joined
Jul 24, 2004
Messages
34
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,286
Activity points
248
Lake is better than Virtuoso.
 

kapils1982

Member level 2
Joined
Dec 3, 2004
Messages
42
Helped
1
Reputation
2
Reaction score
1
Trophy points
1,288
Activity points
408
Cadence is better than Ledit.It has more features.
 

selvaraja

Full Member level 4
Joined
Jun 1, 2004
Messages
190
Helped
6
Reputation
12
Reaction score
3
Trophy points
1,298
Activity points
1,416
cadence is industry standard every one uses ...
 

hbchens

Junior Member level 3
Joined
Aug 29, 2004
Messages
26
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,281
Activity points
282
of course cadence is useful and better,because it be supported by many professional!
 

clj023

Junior Member level 1
Joined
Oct 9, 2005
Messages
17
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,281
Activity points
1,413
I use cadence in my company and use calibra to run drc and lvs. It's my habit.
 

nana_7488

Member level 1
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
32
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,286
Activity points
1,533
However, Ledit is much cheaper than cadence, easier to be used, not bad at all for small medium analog design.

I use it extensively and I'm not dissapointed at all. Furthermore, you can import Virtuoso setup files, perform Dracula-compatible DRC and check your design with Calibre results.

Hi, can you give me some guide how to import Virtuoso setup files, perform Dracula-compatible DRC and check my design with Calibre results using Tanner.
I have to move to Tanner after doing my work on 130nm tech in Cadence when my Cadence already expired and is not renewed by my university. So disappointing, but hopefully can continue my same work in Tanner. Please help me.
Thanks
 

dick_freebird

Advanced Member level 5
Joined
Mar 4, 2008
Messages
7,569
Helped
2,185
Reputation
4,376
Reaction score
2,079
Trophy points
1,393
Location
USA
Activity points
60,477
The important question is, which one does your target foundry
supply a tapeout-approved PDK for? Any other consideration
has to be secondary (if you're serious about actually fabbing
something).

If you only want to play around then one tool is as good as
another. You could use LASI or Electric as far as that goes.
For free.
 

nana_7488

Member level 1
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
32
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,286
Activity points
1,533
Hi, thanks for replying my question, I'm going to fabricate the IC with MOSIS using IBM PDK 130nm.My sv asked me to use Tanner instead of Cadence and Mentor Graphic, like I told u before that I've already have some of my design using Cadence.
I'm doing a digital design, and doing the layout manually before, so I have spend a lot of my time there.That's why I hope I can still use the design in Tanner
 

Mr.wang

Newbie level 3
Joined
Dec 17, 2010
Messages
4
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,281
Activity points
1,298
cadence is very cheap ,nobody can install it in hes pc
 

simon.harpham@ieee.org

Newbie level 4
Joined
Apr 29, 2011
Messages
5
Helped
3
Reputation
6
Reaction score
3
Trophy points
1,283
Activity points
1,333
As a 20+ year user of Cadence tools, I am bemused by what seems to be a general acceptance that it is the best tool for IC design. In my opinion, it is not!

What it is, is an excellent tool for bringing together a cross-discipline design team.

For the individual tasks those teams have to do within their design flow and skill area, there are better tools out there to do those individual tasks (for example L-Edit, ICED, Magic, WinLASI, Calibre and quite a few others for layout depending on what you are trying to do).

My experience of the Cadence tools is that if you are lazy it is excellent as all you have to do is learn to be a "mouse pusher".

If you really want to be an engineer in the dictionary meaning of the word, you need to "look under the hood" to appreciate the compromises that are being made on your behalf in exchange for the higher level of abstraction at which Cadence force you to work. To do any real leading edge design (particularly analogue, RF or the real high speed digital stuff) you need to be able to work at a lower level of abstraction than Cadence offers.

I'd like to hear others opinions on non-cadence tools based on real use on products in production and in particular how they have solved problems that the cadence tools don't/can't.

SimonH.
 

leo_o2

Advanced Member level 4
Joined
Sep 3, 2004
Messages
1,324
Helped
278
Reputation
558
Reaction score
242
Trophy points
1,343
Location
China
Activity points
5,761
Laker seem better. Its designers come from Cadence too.
 

darwinxie

Junior Member level 2
Joined
Dec 3, 2010
Messages
23
Helped
1
Reputation
2
Reaction score
1
Trophy points
1,283
Activity points
1,455
I currently use L-Edit for course project. I haven't tried Cadence yet, but L-Edit is quiet easy to use. The only drawback I experience is the node highlighting is not easy to use..
 

eld03

Member level 2
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
46
Helped
5
Reputation
10
Reaction score
5
Trophy points
1,288
Activity points
1,505
if are going to spend money to fabricate a chip that will work then go for Cadence Spectre , otherwise any tool would be good. Tanner tools are baby tools. their LVS /Extraction / net-list import is rubbish. The T-Spice is accurate simulator comparable with spectre /Hspice. other tools will be useless if BSIM3 or leter models are used , the DC bias point will be oK , but AC , Transient results will be off by 10-30%. Convergence is best in Cadence Spectre.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Top