Cadence® system design and verification solutions, integrated under our System Development Suite, provide the simulation, acceleration, emulation, and management capabilities.
System Development Suite Related Products A-Z
Cadence® digital design and signoff solutions provide a fast path to design closure and better predictability, helping you meet your power, performance, and area (PPA) targets.
Full-Flow Digital Solution Related Products A-Z
Cadence® custom, analog, and RF design solutions can help you save time by automating many routine tasks, from block-level and mixed-signal simulation to routing and library characterization.
Overview Related Products A-Z
Driving efficiency and accuracy in advanced packaging, system planning, and multi-fabric interoperability, Cadence® package implementation products deliver the automation and accuracy.
Cadence® PCB design solutions enable shorter, more predictable design cycles with greater integration of component design and system-level simulation for a constraint-driven flow.
An open IP platform for you to customize your app-driven SoC design.
Comprehensive solutions and methodologies.
Helping you meet your broader business goals.
A global customer support infrastructure with around-the-clock help.
24/7 Support - Cadence Online Support
Locate the latest software updates, service request, technical documentation, solutions and more in your personalized environment.
Cadence offers various software services for download. This page describes our offerings, including the Allegro FREE Physical Viewer.
Get the most out of your investment in Cadence technologies through a wide range of training offerings.
This course combines our Allegro PCB Editor Basic Techniques, followed by Allegro PCB Editor Intermediate Techniques.
Virtuoso Analog Design Environment Verifier 16.7
Learn learn to perform requirements-driven analog verification using the Virtuoso ADE Verifier tool.
Exchange ideas, news, technical information, and best practices.
The community is open to everyone, and to provide the most value, we require participants to follow our Community Guidelines that facilitate a quality exchange of ideas and information.
It's not all about the technlogy. Here we exchange ideas on the Cadence Academic Network and other subjects of general interest.
Cadence is a leading provider of system design tools, software, IP, and services.
Get email delivery of the Cadence blog featured here
I agree, having people in the front-end with back-end knowledge is valuable and pays dividends. In my previous company, we set-up a flow (based on my boss' broad experience from RTL to layout, and pain points) of doing quick prototyping with an array of tools. Once I got my hands on the RTL, I would take it through the whole flow, including floorplanning, P&R with detail routing and timing analysis. By doing this, it helped improve the transparency between logic/physical worlds (front-end/back-end wall). Now, not every firm can do this, since they can't have every engineer running all the tools (and not everyone has the tools), but this is one example of where transparency between the front and backend can help with accelerated design closure and predictabiity. Maybe something like this can be incorporated in the ASIC flow as an option (maybe people are already doing this in some sense, I don't know many who do though in general). Throwing the design "over the wall" from the front-end people has never worked well in my experience for aggressive designs that push technology limits if it doesn't have some physical due diligence included.
When I think back on my tapeouts (I’m a 16 veteran of the chip wars), the ones that went best were the ones where the front and back end teams felt as if they were all part of the same battle. Conversely, when it was “us versus them”, getting the chip out really did feel like a war.
So maybe nothing is really different – to be successful, we’ve always really had to work together. Perhaps what is really new is that the old methods of working around uncooperative teams don’t work any more. In the old days, if my back end guys complained about bad timing, I’d just squeeze the clock or re-write the RTL. If the die was too big, we could squeeze the scripts. If we needed to change something at the last minute, I’d just go and beg.
With the tight schedules, tight targets, and tight teams, this doesn’t work any more. If there’s an issue in P&R, the front end teams need to know about it as soon as possible – preferably without wasting a bunch of backend resources. And all the teams need to operate with real system constraints – power, timing, area, yield, etc. In today’s environment, over constraining costs too much time and money.
Where's the RTL hand-off?! It seems like only yesterday.... I saw this panel too. It was really a good one, packed with a dense amount of information on experience from some really smart engineers. I hope that this one was recorded, because I would like to hear it again.