Semiwiki EDA Webinar 800x100

SoC QoS gets help from machine learning

SoC QoS gets help from machine learning
by Don Dingee on 07-29-2016 at 4:00 pm

Several companies have attacked the QoS problem in SoC design, and what is emerging from that conversation is the best approach may be several approaches combined in a hybrid QoS solution. At the recent Linley Group Mobile Conference, NetSpeed Systems outlined just such a solution with an unexpected plot twist in synthesis.

The QoS picture isn’t as simple as it looks; there are more factors than slotting traffic in some priority scheme where higher priority stuff moves through the system with less blocking. NetSpeed’s Joe Rowlands called this “lossy” information transfer, where local decisions on traffic patterns might solve a localized problem but don’t necessarily help overall system performance.

Let’s separate out the fact that IP blocks tend to speak different QoS languages – the case for using a network-on-chip in abstracting QoS in the first place. Complexity versus priority becomes more obvious in this diagram:


It’s interesting how these were classified. The difference between “variable” and “dynamic” is a difference between data traffic and user interaction. Also, the assignment of the GPU to “low” makes an assumption that it has enough memory bandwidth and typically outruns most of its tasks. And, putting the camera in “real-time” is a distinction – as with any pixel processing engine, some latency to get it started is OK, but once it is rolling operations have to proceed deterministically, otherwise there are unacceptable gaps in the output.

Overlay on top of that diagram steps for power optimization and the problem of sequencing agents, and the issues of cache coherency and memory control. NetSpeed uses what they call a layered SoC interconnect synthesis solution, a lot of words for multiple approaches working together to solve different aspects of the problem. There are two key elements of their solution: Pegasus, a “last level cache” block that can serve as traditional memory cache or configurable cache at other points in the network; and Gemini, their coherent NoC IP.


With multiple cache controllers and specialized accelerators, Gemini offers massive configurability in a formally proven, deadlock-free interconnect. How should a NoC be configured? NetSpeed has deployed machine learning algorithms to the NoC synthesis problem to set their router topology and link width, virtual channel, and buffer sizes. Instead of setting QoS only on a per-router basis, bandwidth is allocated at the system level for end-to-end QoS, accounting for cases with low power modes.


The results of traffic-based adaptability, power control, and cache configurability combined with the machine learning router configuration yield solid results. (Comparing results between competing NoC implementations is nearly impossible unless one were to implement the same complex SoC in every variant. Even then, different optimization strategies would produce different results – see the Apple A9 dual sourcing conversation for a case in point.) NetSpeed offers a chart from what they say is a tier 1 mobile OEM using manual bandwidth tuning versus the automated NetSpeed synthesis. It is clear NetSpeed’s automation outperforms on bandwidth in every use case considered, sometimes dramatically.


NetSpeed also claims a development time advantage, and I think that takes into account what would likely be multiple trial-and-error runs in manual iterations. No info was provided on how much simulation goes into the machine learning optimization process, but even a significant up-front simulation effort would appear to be worth the wait. There’s more discussion on what they simulate on the NetSpeed Gemini product page.

I’m hearing this story more and more often – EDA tools are infringing on system-level expertise with automation of very complex design optimization problems. It’s a classic make-versus-buy conflict, where years of experience might seem threatened by adopting a tool that might do things better. But, the bottom line in this new industry environment probably isn’t the huge mobile SoC design pursued by a small army of specialists. The target for these types of tools may be mid-range SoC designs in areas like the IoT where the years of SoC design experience isn’t built into the organization. Tools like NetSpeed will help teams with moderate system-level experience get better optimized chips designed faster.


Industry Analyst Perspectives On The Apple WWDC 2016 Keynote

Industry Analyst Perspectives On The Apple WWDC 2016 Keynote
by Patrick Moorhead on 07-29-2016 at 12:00 pm

I was in-person and live at Apple’s WWDC keynote in San Francisco. The following are my quick takeaways from the event.

Watch and watchOS:
Apple is focusing on exactly what they should be with watchOS, and that’s speed, ease of use and upping the ante in health and fitness. With the first Watch and watchOS, Apple solved many of the problems with wrist wearables, but not all of them. Watch was perceived by many as slow.

If the experience is anything close to what Apple showed, this will make a huge difference and remove many purchase objections and I believe with a little marketing, increase sales.

Watch already has the experience, insight and accuracy lead in health and fitness and these improvements like activity sharing to the ability to encourage and smack talk only cements that lead.

The Breathe app is a natural extension of Apple to attack daily health. Breathing is as important as sleeping. What I wish it could do is to tell me when I’m anxious or stressed and tell me when to do it, similar to standing.


(Photo credit: Patrick Moorhead)

Given the impressive developer stats, tvOS is getting developer traction. The improvements to search, adding many video channels, phone as a remote, and instant watching will make huge improvements in the experience. Instant Sign On is the Trojan horse, where if cable companies supported, could really replace the cable box.

What will determine commercial success will be Apple’s ability to market it as consumers will need to be reminded what the new Apple TV can do. Many consumers see Apple TV as what it was before, and that’s a streamer, not an interactive platform.

I still believe the omission of 4K video capabilities is an oversight and will limit Apple TV to a mainstream audience, which from a volume standpoint is OK, but not perceptual standpoint. Apple does premium experiences and 4K is premium.


(Photo credit: Patrick Moorhead)

Mac and macOS Sierra:
Apple brought some of the biggest improvements to macOS in years. These are black and white features, not shades of gray, that dramatically impact the user experience. Auto unlock with Watch and Apple Pay on the web are huge as they change what many of us do every day on our PCs or Macs, that is, to login and buy stuff.


(Photo credit: Patrick Moorhead)
With Optimized Storage, Apple may have finally gotten cloud storage right and will be better positioned to compete with Microsoft and Google. If the service works as reliably and as quickly as what they showed on stage, this could drive many consumers to even reconsider a Mac. Once people let this feature settle in, the more fanfare it will get.

iPhone and iPad and iOS:
iOS 10 appears to be the biggest release since iOS 8 and Apple has opened up the “crown jewels” of their OS. With iOS 10, Apple has given developers deep access to Siri, iMessage, and Maps, and that’s huge. While Apple was less prescriptive as Facebook, Google, and Microsoft, this serves as Apple’s answer to CaaS (conversations as a service) and bots. The Apple platform is there and ready to do this, and a whole lot more.

Opening up Siri will make an enormous effect on the experience. I don’t see anything Google can do that Apple cannot, and they’re doing it with the highest levels of privacy, which is unique. It’s apparent Apple has been working on this for a long time and in many ways, appears ahead of where Google is with their developers on an intelligent agent.


(Photo credit: Patrick Moorhead)

HomeKit and Home app:
There aren’t many HomeKit-enabled devices in aggregate now, but I like what I heard from Apple. Security and privacy are key and sometimes that stretches out time for manufacturers to be ready with security compliant-hardware. I was pleasantly surprised to see the Home App as I thought that was a missing element at launch. The Home App will dramatically improve usability for the consumer.


(Photo credit: Patrick Moorhead)

Privacy and AI:
Apple made many good points on privacy and have found a unique way to maintain privacy and provide personal and differentiated AI services. Essentially, Apple does training in the cloud on non-personal information then does the inference on the device.


(Photo credit: Patrick Moorhead)

I’m a bit blown away how they did this but when you own the hardware, software and the cloud, this opens up a lot of possibilities. I believe Apple has done much more with AI than they talk about. Siri is a complete AI platform and they were first to market with one. Even their phone multitasking and power management uses AI schemas. I believe if Apple let’s people under the AI covers we will see elements of AI leadership.

More from Moor Insights and Strategy


Dragging RTL Creation into the 21st Century

Dragging RTL Creation into the 21st Century
by Bernard Murphy on 07-29-2016 at 7:00 am

When I was at Atrenta, we always thought it would be great to do as-you-type RTL linting. It’s the natural use model for anyone used to writing text in virtually any modern application (especially on the Web, thanks to Google spell and grammar-checks). You may argue that you create your RTL in Vi or EMACS and you don’t need no stinking GUI. I have bad news for you – you are now officially part of the older generation. “Kids” graduating these days expect GUI support for any code they create. So get used to it.

Naturally there are limits to how far you can take real-time checking. It would be neither practical nor useful to launch CDC or formal analysis every time you hit the space or Return key. But that’s not what up and coming developers expect. They want the editor to flag and, if appropriate, correct the basic errors. This is especially important for VHDL development, which can be particularly challenging for VHDL novices (in which group I count myself). I should add that Sigasi provides similar capabilities for Verilog and for mixed-language.

On VHDL, you might argue “who cares – everything I do is in Verilog”. That purist stance is more difficult to sustain these days. Perhaps you have to integrate an Imagination Technologies GPU into your SoC (or one or more of many other IPs) and you need to add power management or other tweaks to support your integration. You’re going to have to deal with VHDL and the less experience you have, the more mistakes, you’re going to make (and the more time you’re going to spend trying to understand those mistakes). I can personally vouch for this. A language-aware editor would have made my life a lot easier.


Sigasi, based in Belgium, has created just such a linting capability, embedded in their Sigasi Studio product line. The base set checks for a wide range of common mistakes in VHDL:
· Unused declarations
· Duplicate declarations
· Declaration could not be found
· VHDL 2008 features in VHDL 93 mode
· Assignment validation
· Case statement validation
· Instantiation statement validation
· Library validation
· Range validation
· Deprecated and non-standard packages
· Duplicate, conflicting design unit names
· Missing return statement in function bodies
· Missing, unnecessary and duplicate signals in the sensitivity list
· Port, signal, variable, constant or generic declarations that are never read or written

A more advanced set checks for:
· Null range error
· Use of deprecated packages
· Redundant use of OTHERS
· Defining function bodies inside packages
· Infinite loops and processes without sensitivity lists
· Incorrect use of whitespace in some contexts
· Reference to unneeded libraries
· Unused declarations for ports, generics, signals, etc
· Incomplete and over-specified sensitivity lists


The most advanced version includes checks for:
· Dead states in FSMs
· Inaccessible code
· Objects never written or never read
· Naming conventions
· Consistent capitalization
· Case references
· Incomplete associate optional
· Positional association in instances

I’d like to call out a couple of these checks since they may seem like “wow, who really cares”, where in fact they can bite you badly. Start with naming conventions. Like it or not, a lot of in-house checks and generation tools depend on consistent naming conventions to drive connectivity creation and checking. Automatic connectivity creation tools are completely dependent on you following consistent naming conventions. Such a tool will automatically connect together AHB_PCI_SLAVE (on a PCI IP) and AHB_PCI_SLAVE_MIRROR (on the AHB bus), but will ignore the connection if you didn’t follow the convention. Some relatively simple name checking can save you a whole lot of problems.


Then take consistent capitalization. VHDL doesn’t care about capitalization, but this can lull you into a false sense of security. Capitalization does matter when you get to a Verilog/VHDL interface, because Verilog does care about capitalization and you’ll not get a connection if this is wrong. Both this problem and the preceding problem are good examples of things that will seem perfectly fine while you’re working on an IP but will bite you in integration (and it may take quite a while to figure out why).

Sigasi analysis will generate informational, warning and error flags and will indicate where quick fixes are available (I really wish I had those when I was messing with VHDL). The Studio applications in which the linter is available come (optionally) in an Eclipse app, so should plug in easily to common RTL development environments.

You can learn more about Sigasi check-as-you-type capabilities HERE.

More articles by Bernard…


Why Elon Musk’s crazy plans for Tesla aren’t crazy

Why Elon Musk’s crazy plans for Tesla aren’t crazy
by Vivek Wadhwa on 07-28-2016 at 4:00 pm

Elon Musk recently laid out a “master plan” for where his company, Tesla Motors, is heading. The vision is undoubtedly ambitious: four new kinds of Tesla vehicles, solar initiatives, autonomous driving technologies and a ride-sharing program.
Continue reading “Why Elon Musk’s crazy plans for Tesla aren’t crazy”


Stressed out about Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) or Electrical Overstress (EOS)?

Stressed out about Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) or Electrical Overstress (EOS)?
by bkeppens on 07-28-2016 at 12:00 pm

Do not lose sleep worrying that your integrated circuits might fail during EOS/ESD events. Join us for the 38th annual EOS/ESD Symposium in Anaheim, CA in September. Experts on the field will address the latest research on EOS and ESD in the rapidly changing world of electronics.

As electronics continue to become commonplace in every aspect of our lives, including medical applications, the control of our homes, and our cars, cost and reliability are of utmost importance. To accommodate these requirements and overcome challenges, progress has to be made in the form of creative ESD design, innovative, comprehensive, and predictive verification methods and on the side of the factor control standards and methods.

The 2016 EOS/ESD Symposium addresses this and more through tutorials, workshops, technical sessions, invited talks, and through the products and services presented in the industry exhibits.

There are 13 technical sessions covering topics like factory and materials, advanced CMOS, high voltage and RF ESD challenges, EOS/ESD case studies, device physics and modeling, ESD EDA tools, system level ESD, and ESD testing.

Download the entire program on our website, register for the event and stop losing sleep over ESD issues.

ESD Fundamentals: A six-part series on Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) prepared by the ESD Association

History & Background
To many people, Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) is only experienced as a shock when touching a metal doorknob after walking across a carpeted floor or after sliding across a car seat. However, static electricity and ESD has been a serious industrial problem for centuries. As early as the 1400s, European and Caribbean military forts were using static control procedures and devices trying to prevent inadvertent electrostatic discharge ignition of gunpowder stores. By the 1860s, paper mills throughout the U.S. employed basic grounding, flame ionization techniques, and steam drums to dissipate static electricity from the paper web as it traveled through the drying process. Every imaginable business and industrial process has issues with electrostatic charge and discharge at one time or another. Munitions and explosives, petrochemical, pharmaceutical, agriculture, printing and graphic arts, textiles, painting, and plastics are just some of the industries where control of static electricity has significant importance. The age of electronics brought with it new problems associated with static electricity and electrostatic discharge. And, as electronic devices become faster and the circuitry getting smaller, their sensitivity to ESD in general increases. This trend may be accelerating. The ESD Association’s “Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) Technology Roadmap”, revised April 2010, includes “With devices becoming more sensitive through 2010-2015 and beyond, it is imperative that companies begin to scrutinize the ESD capabilities of their handling processes”. Today, ESD impacts productivity and product reliability in virtually every aspect of the global electronics environment.

Despite a great deal of effort during the past thirty years, ESD still affects production yields, manufacturing cost, product quality, product reliability, and profitability. The cost of damaged devices themselves ranges from only a few cents for a simple diode to thousands of dollars for complex integrated circuits. When associated costs of repair and rework, shipping, labor, and overhead are included, clearly the opportunities exist for significant improvements. Nearly all of the thousands of companies involved in electronics manufacturing today pay attention to the basic, industry accepted elements of static control. ESD Association industry standards are available today to guide manufacturers in establishing the fundamental static charge mitigation and control techniques (see Part Six – ESD Standards). It is unlikely that any company which ignores static control will be able to successfully manufacture and deliver undamaged electronic parts.


SEMICON West – Leti FDSOI and IOT, status and roadmap

SEMICON West – Leti FDSOI and IOT, status and roadmap
by Scotten Jones on 07-28-2016 at 7:00 am

On Tuesday, July 12th at SEMICON West I had an opportunity to sit down with Marie Semeria, the CEO of Leti and discuss the status and future of FDSOI. Leti pioneered FDSOI 15 years ago and has been the leading FDSOI research ever since.

Two years ago Leti and ST Micro demonstrated products on 28nm that are cost competitive with bulk technology. For the first time the industry could consider two approaches to leading edge requirements, FinFET for high-end and FDSOI for low-cost and flexible IOT designs. Both technologies can cover multiple technology nodes. Since then ST has licensed 28nm to Samsung and Global Foundries and 14nm developed with Leti to Global Foundries. Global Foundries is now preparing to introduce a 22nm technology, 22FDX based on the Leti-ST 14nm front end with a relaxed back end for cost. FDSOI is out of research into foundries and an IDM and products are coming out.

In terms of scalability:

  • 14nm – demonstrated the technology is scalable to 14nm with ST Micro.
  • 10nm – they have completed modeling and some test devices. They have a full integration scheme and they have shown the modeling matches the actual results allowing them to have confidence when they use modeling to extrapolate to the next node. Strained SOI and silicon germanium are 10nm performance boosters but even with the current substrate they can meet 10nm requirements.
  • 7nm – modeling done.
  • 5nm – beyond 7nm Leti believes that at 5nm horizontal nanowires will be the next technology.

Authors note – the following table was added to the article on 8/10/2016

Leti defines the nodes mentioned above as follows where CPP = contacted poly pitch.

[TABLE] align=”center” class=”cms_table_grid” style=”width: 300px”
|- class=”cms_table_grid_tr”
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” | Node (nm)
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” style=”text-align: center” | 14
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” style=”text-align: center” | 10
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” style=”text-align: center” | 7
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” style=”text-align: center” | 5
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” style=”text-align: center” | 3
|- class=”cms_table_grid_tr”
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” | CPP (pitch)
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” style=”text-align: center” | 80
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” style=”text-align: center” | 60
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” style=”text-align: center” | 50
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” style=”text-align: center” | 40
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” style=”text-align: center” | 30
|- class=”cms_table_grid_tr”
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” | M1 (pitch)
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” style=”text-align: center” | 64
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” style=”text-align: center” | 48
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” style=”text-align: center” | 40
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” style=”text-align: center” | 32
| class=”cms_table_grid_td” style=”text-align: center” | 24
|-

Commercially 28nm is running at ST and Samsung and 22nm is coming up at Global Foundries. Global Foundries plans a follow-on to 22nm and Leti has assignees in Dresden working with Global Foundries and discussions are ongoing. The exact node for the follow-on technology hasn’t been announced yet (authors note – in a recent interview with Samsung they also discussed a follow-on technology to the 28nm process they are running; they want to avoid multi-patterning for cost reasons so it sounds like a relaxed 22nm technology at Samsung, at Global Foundries my guess is something in the 12nm to 16nm range will be next).

The ecosystem for FDSOI is completely established with fabless, foundries, IP companies and IDMs all supporting it. Leti has established the silicon impulse initiative as a gateway for designers to get trained and use multi-project wafers to evaluate FDSOI. In one year more than 20 companies have joined the initiative to assess the technology. There are over 60 tape-outs running at ST, Global Foundries and Samsung.

Marie expects to see many more FDSOI products in IOT due to low energy consumption and the ability to support RF and embedded memory. They have demonstrated RF to over 300Ghz! Leti is working with ST to develop back-end memory for 28nm or 20nm for a microcontroller. The memory may be PCM or OxRAM. Leti is also working with Spin Tech on magnetic memory, they have a European research grant and are focused on embedded memory and low voltage operation.

IOT is a very fragmented market today and requires a lot of different types of IP, FDSOI could be the IOT platform. In automotive IOT it is at the connected device level, plus processing of data and security. More and more big companies are developing their own structures and clouds to manage data. SOI has good radiation hardness and that is an advantage for automotive. At DAC Leti demonstrated a new driver assistance system using an ST microcontroller. Automotive needs low cost and global environment coverage, Leti has a probabilistic approach that avoids floating point operations and lowers computing requirements by 100x and power by 200-400x. In IOT you have to think about specific requirements of the application and then you can have tremendous impact on power and cost. You don’t need a lot of capacity in computing if you look at the whole system. They are working with companies in automotive to optimize the system to keep relevant information close to the sensors and optimize it for the type of operation.

In the late nineties IBM introduced partially depleted SOI (PDSOI) in their internal processor line. I suggested to Marie that because PDSOI required an expensive SOI substrate and yet didn’t reduce process costs it was an expensive solution and created an image of SOI an unaffordable whereas FDSOI greatly reduces the process complexity making FDSOI far more affordable (authors note – IBM’s processor needs were for high performance and cost wasn’t really an issue). My belief is this created a perception of SOI as high cost that FDSOI is still working to overcome and Marie agreed with me on this.

Today with Global Foundries poised to ramp 22FD and Samsung and ST running 28nm FDSOI is finally poised to take off. Global Foundries and Samsung are also both planning follow on nodes and FDSOI has a path to continue to scale for many years.


A Chinese smartphone drill in progress

A Chinese smartphone drill in progress
by Don Dingee on 07-27-2016 at 4:00 pm

One of our astute readers caught what looks like a major gaffe in the Linley Group mobile conference presentations from this week. It’s another indication of the speed of change in mobile markets and the instability that is giving Apple and others heartburn.

Here’s the chart in question:


The point of contention is who, exactly, are the China tier 1 vendors? Linley lists Huawei, Lenovo, Xiaomi, Yulong, and ZTE. As it turns out, that is outdated info according the IDC Worldwide Quarterly Mobile Phone Tracker:


Never heard of OPPO or vivo? I was flipping channels last night and saw some reality show where the participants were holding an OPPO phone. It turns out both brands are owned by BBK Electronics, and there’s a third brand coming soon called imoo. It’s insane how quickly these Chinese brands are appearing and disappearing on the top 5 mobile list, although OPPO and vivo have been out there for several years quietly building.

(For those not familiar with the title reference, a “Chinese fire drill” was a popular game among teenage drivers out on the town with their friends, where everyone would exit the car at a stoplight and run around it until the light turned green, and whomever was nearest the driver door jumped in and took control. Maybe we need to call it the “American fire drill” now.)

The importance of this list in the Linley argument is who is or may soon be doing their own LTE chipsets – a bullet on their slides says the top 3 plus “internal” make up 98% of mobile. Qualcomm still owns the high end, and MediaTek has surpassed the internal vendors: Apple, Huawei, and Samsung combined. We know Xiaomi has their soon-to-release “Rifle” chipset.

The days of premium mobile brands and high-end chipsets may be coming to a close, however, at least in terms of who makes the most money. Even Linley says that most of the remaining mobile growth is at the low end in developing countries, and that MediaTek and Spreadtrum are the primary beneficiaries of that trend.

In response, Qualcomm continues to push their offering lower, and made a compelling argument for a scalable LTE roadmap:


That’s why Qualcomm was all lathered up in their recent earnings report about unnamed Chinese companies not counting chips correctly – these numbers are starting to get pretty big. I suspect we’ll see more change in this in the coming quarters, it’s moved substantially since we published “Mobile Unleashed” about 8 months ago.


When Waze Comes to Town

When Waze Comes to Town
by Roger C. Lanctot on 07-27-2016 at 12:00 pm

Waze’s Connected Citizens program, rolled out in October of 2014, was envisioned as a means for cities to create a two-way data exchange between Waze users and cities for communicating urgent traffic information as well as to facilitate the analysis of traffic patterns. In other words, Waze wanted to be part of the solution to the traffic woes plaguing cities all over the world.

Connected Citizens Fact Sheet:http://tinyurl.com/h6e7ste

The concept is clever and forward thinking – nothing similar has been publicly pursued by competitors TomTom and HERE which have built their business around auto makers, transportation departments and enterprise applications. Waze is unique as a business-to-consumer application-based and crowdsourced traffic solution. The application has become so popular, in fact, that in recent years it has become part of the problem it was intended to solve.

Launched with 10 cities around the world, the program now claims 63 partners including city, state and country government agencies, nonprofits and first responders. Waze has become the de facto traffic and navigation app of choice in many cities where it is available. This pervasiveness has introduced a Waze Factor into local traffic management efforts.

From Washington, DC, to San Francisco, Los Angeles and Sao Paulo, Waze users (Wazers?) are following Waze’s traffic-influenced route guidance slavishly into secondary and tertiary streets not built for nor accustomed to large volumes of traffic. This scenario has forced potential Connected Citizen partners to invite Waze in for a chat to better understand how the app is influencing local traffic and how local authorities can work with Waze to find coping strategies.

In some instances, Waze has offered to adjust its algorithms to shift traffic away from troublespots identified by local agencies. But Waze’s willingness and ability to make these adjustments has exposed the fact that Waze isn’t so much basing its guidance on predictive models as it is sending its users to the nearest open routes.

The latest wrinkle is a lawsuit being brought by a toll road operator in Israel claiming that Waze is deliberately steering its users away from or at least not offering the option of using the company’s Fast Lane on Route 1 into Tel Aviv. (Waze Sued over Toll Road Rerouting – http://tinyurl.com/zr65gcv)
Depending on the outcome of the lawsuit we can now add Waze’s willingness to put its thumb on the routing scales for reasons known only to Waze. What are Waze’s other shortcomings?

[LIST=1]

  • Multi-minute lag in identifying incidents
  • Multi-minute lag in identifying the conclusion of an incident
  • Distracting pop-up offers and notifications
  • Preference for secondary and tertiary roads
  • Guidance based on real-time, rather than predictive modeling

    As always in the case of Waze, the key caveat is: Use whatever traffic/navigation app works best for you.

    The Connected Citizens outreach to cities is a positive step to integrate local traffic and incident reports into the Waze app. The effort can certainly help improve traffic event identification.
    The new traffic reality is that Waze’s influence has become a factor in the very problem it is trying to solve. City, state and Federal traffic agencies around the world are wise to heed Waze. The question remains as to whether Waze is a weed or a virus infecting the traffic landscape or whether Waze will become the dominant and preferred means of communicating official traffic information to drivers.
    Car makers, navigation software designers, system integrators and traffic information companies will do well to weigh Waze’s influence and its clever marketing efforts. Waze has a growing roster of competitors gathering vehicle probe data including transportation network companies and insurance companies running usage-based insurance programs. The question that remains: Who are you going to call next time you’re in a jam?

    Roger C. Lanctot is Associate Director in the Global Automotive Practice at Strategy Analytics. More details about Strategy Analytics can be found here: https://www.strategyanalytics.com/access-services/automotive#.VuGdXfkrKUk


  • Qualcomm Demonstrates First Sub-6 GHz 5G New Radio Prototype

    Qualcomm Demonstrates First Sub-6 GHz 5G New Radio Prototype
    by Patrick Moorhead on 07-27-2016 at 7:00 am

    You may not know this, but on-time delivery at expected performance with 5G is being determined right now in engineering labs across the globe. This is true even though end user deployments won’t be for another three to four years. You see, the ground is being laid right now with manufacturers, operators and standards bodies. With 5G being so far away, there is still time for companies like Ericsson, Huawei, Intel, Nokia, Qualcomm and Samsung Electronics to stake their claims on 5G. Qualcomm, at Mobile World Congress Shanghai, will be showing the first (to my knowledge) public demonstration of 5G NR at sub-6 GHz in a prototype platform for development and testing. This may not sound like a big deal, but it is. Let me explain with some background first.


    Qualcomm 5G NR sub 6GHz. pro system and trial platform (Photo credit: Qualcomm)

    5G has many use cases and ways to use spectrum and data
    Some companies have already performed demonstrations of certain 5G NR technologies like mmWave and some with very high throughput figures attached to relatively simple demonstrations of the technology. However, 5G is not just one multi-gigabit, multi-gigahertz new radio (NR) technology, it is much more complex than that and incorporates a new ways of handling different types of spectrum and data.

    5G needs to deal with flavors ranging from low bandwidth fixed broad IoT installations all the way up to high frequency high bandwidth infrastructure and even ultra-low latency applications for drones and cars. Oh and smartphones, too.


    5G has different use cases and ways to incorporate spectrum and data (Image credit: Qualcomm)

    5G encompasses wide variations of spectrum

    This means that just having 5G mmWave technology and a 4G fallback will likely not be enough to fully address all the different types of connectivity expected to utilize 5G. Specifically, there is a pretty broad gap between the applications of mmWave and low frequency 4G (sub-1 GHz) that will need to be filled for the majority of 5G applications. This is actually where many expect that the “meat” of 5G’s usage will be experienced by the user. That’s why Qualcomm’s demonstration of a new sub-6 GHz 5G New Radio (NR) prototype at Mobile World Congress Shanghai is so important.


    5G encompasses wide variations of spectrum (Image Credit: Qualcomm)

    Qualcomm’s 5G NR sub-6GHz. prototype
    Qualcomm’s 5G NR sub-6 GHz prototype system is not just a prototype for internal use, but like their mmWave prototype they showed in late 2015, it also serves as a trial platform for their partners and for 5G design validation and 3GPP standard contribution. This testbed for testing and demonstration incorporates both ends of the link, not just the user equipment. This is extremely important for the development of 5G because it means that their partners are able to work alongside them in the development and adopt the same technologies on the way to 5G. Because the first formal 3GPP 5G standard isn’t expected to be finalized until 2018, it is important for partners to work together and update their testing platforms to fit the movement of the standard.

    As such, Qualcomm’s platform for sub-6 GHz will be extremely important for addressing the spectrum between the current 4G LTE Advanced deployments and the expected mmWave deployments in the areas above 6 GHz like Qualcomm’s tested 28 GHz. The prototype currently operates at 3-5 GHz, but is designed to also address frequencies below 3 GHz as well.

    Benefits of 5G NR inside 6GHz. include reusing macro cells
    The benefits of operating 5G NR at sub-6 GHz is that you are able to incorporate all of the new 5G advanced wireless technologies while also being able to reuse existing macro cell sites. These macro sites can theoretically transmit up to 1.7 km at 4 GHz using Massive MIMO technology which is a 5G technology and can allow for significantly increased capacity and throughput. Qualcomm is able to deliver multi-Gbps bandwidth using 100+ MHz of spectrum at very low latency (sub 10 ms) enabled by the new self-contained TDD sub-frame and use of sub-6 GHz spectrum which is crucial for latency-intensive applications of 5G like remote vehicles as well as augmented reality.

    Qualcomm first to publicly demonstrate 5G NR
    This is the first time anyone has, to my knowledge, publicly shown 5G New Radio operating in the 3-5 GHz spectrum. This leadership from Qualcomm isn’t particularly surprising. Let’s run down the facts. Qualcomm:
    [LIST=1]

  • led in 4G and arguably had a two-year advantage on every other vendor
  • first and still the only 1 Gbps smartphone modem and RF front-end for 4G
  • first with smartphone MU-MIMO Wi-Fi and smartphone Wi-Fi AD

    This matters for more than chest-beating because many aspects of the technologies above are integrated into 5G. This is not to forget all of the mission critical, lower bandwidth applications that 5G will enable, but it does give consumers an easier metric of overall performance.

    Qualcomm Research’s 5G NR prototypes will allow them to continue to develop and revise their prototypes as the 3GPP study items are decided. Eventually, this revision process will land Qualcomm and their partners at the finalized 5G standard hopefully sometime in 2017 when the 3GPP’s Release 15 is announced.

    I’m looking forward to seeing the competitive response as rising waters lift all boats.

    More from Moor Insights and Strategy


  • More Details on the Smartphone and Wearables Market

    More Details on the Smartphone and Wearables Market
    by Daniel Nenni on 07-26-2016 at 4:00 pm

    The Linley Mobile Conference opened today with a nice keynote overview of the mobile market evolution. In the media I see a lot of doom and gloom articles about smartphones and wearables but if you look at it closely you will see a natural growth curve evolving.

    The mobile semiconductor market is evolving as vendors split their focus between the massive smartphone market and the rapidly growing market for wearables such as fitness bands and smartwatches. This presentation will discuss the end products that are driving new demand and the chip-level products that support them. Linley will also discuss technology trends in these mobile devices and provide market data including 2015 market share and updated forecasts.


    One of the most interesting observations Linley made was on the mobile application processor consolidation driven by systems companies. Apple started it all with their A4 SoC which used the ARM Cortex-A8 core and Imagination Technologies PowerVR GPU. In the beginning, standard IP was used for the majority of SoCs but now custom IP is prevalent. For example, Apple licenses the ARM architecture and creates their own custom cores. Apple does not however design a GPU or modem yet, but it is coming, absolutely.

    Side note: In 2013 Apple turned the SoC market upside down with the first 64-bit SoC based on the TSMC 20nm platform. This is well documented in our book “Mobile Unleashed” but the long story made short, Qualcomm first belittled Apple’s 64-bit masterpiece as a “marketing ploy” only to follow with a knee jerk reaction that would send their stock and employee count tumbling. QCOM has since recovered with their latest 14nm SnapDragon 820/821 offering which is best in class, for now.

    Samsung and Huawei are also doing their own custom SoCs which means the top three smartphone vendors do not have to buy merchant SoCs from the likes of Qualcomm and MediaTek. Xiaomi is the number four smartphone vendor and I was told that they also licensed the ARM architecture and may stop using QCOM and MKT SoCs in the near future. If you add up the smartphone market share of Samsung, Apple, Huawei, and Xiaomi you will get a number greater than 90% which is one reason why Intel, Marvell, and others are getting out of the merchant SoC business.


    Wearables mostly use standard processors with the exception of the Apple watch which uses recycled 28nm iPhone5 technology. Most Android watches use QCOM SnapDragons, the Fitbit uses STMicro MCUs, and the Xaomi Mi Band uses a Cypress part.

    Given that the smart watch dominates the wearables market and cost is critical, look for more custom silicon from systems companies (Apple, Samsung, Xioami, etc…) in the next generation of smart watches and even fitness bands. I would also be willing to bet that FD-SOI will be used for wearables in the not so distant future given the FinFET-like performance and power efficiency with a much lower cost . FD-SOI today also has superior RF/Analog capabilities over FinFETs, especially if you are looking at the GF 22FDX process (read more about 22FDX HERE).