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.
It goes without saying that performing
logical synthesis without timing or power constraints is of limited value at
best. The netlist that is painstakingly crafted by a synthesis tool is very
much tied to a particular set of constraints. Cell function and sizes have been
selected to meet the timing targets and cell power and VT attributes have been
considered in order to meet the power targets. Logic cones have been
iteratively optimized to meet these targets. Taking a netlist that has been
generated using a specific set of constraints and applying a radically
different set of constraints will certainly result in poorer than expected
Quality of Silicon as compared to generating a netlist from scratch using the
second set of constraints.
So why would performing physical
prediction and optimization without a floorplan fare any better than performing
logical synthesis without adequate constraints? A floorplan is certainly a
constraint for physical implementation. The same holds true for physical
synthesis. At the most basic level, a floorplan sets a limit on the amount of
real estate that is available for a design. The die size and the associated
aspect ratio dictate the dimensions of the silicon. This is a constraint on the
maximum size for a design. It is also a constraint on the nature of the net
lengths since a tall skinny rectangular aspect ratio will have a very different
net length distribution than a square aspect ratio. The port and hard block
locations specified by the floorplan will certainly impact cell placement
estimation as well as the net length estimation. The cell structure of a path
going from a port to a RAM on the other side of the die will be quite different
from the structure of path going from a port to a near by RAM. The list goes on
and on. Placement and routing blockages will affect the nature of the placement
and the layout of the net routing which will in turn affect the path delays.
Placement regions will dictate the geographical location for associated logic
which will affect the length of the intra-block and inter-block nets. The
location and size of the power domains will certainly have an effect as well.
Just as traditional synthesis
constraints evolve and are refine during the design process, so too can evolve
the constraints supplied by the floorplan. Early in the design process a die
size may suffice. As the design becomes more concrete, additional constraints
such as port and hard block locations can be specified. Further design
refinement and analysis may show the need for placement guides. The end result
is the detailed and optimized floorplan that is used for the physical
Each design process is a bit different
so it would be great to hear about some that are in use. How early are the
block or chip die size and aspect ratio available in your design flow? Where
does this initial estimate come from? If you’ve been asking yourself this same
question then you may want to give InCyte Chip Estimator a look. It is ideal
for this. How early is port and block placement information available in the
design flow? In your experience, how often is the floorplan updated during the