RVN! 26 Banner revised (800 x 100 px) (600 x 100 px)
Semiconductor Expert Forum

Posted on

Chip-Package-System Solution Center

Chip-Package-System Solution Center
by Paul McLellan on 08-14-2012 at 5:48 pm
Categories: Ansys, Inc., EDA

One of the really big changes about chip design is the way over the last decade or so it is no longer possible to design an SoC, a package for it to go in and the board for the package using different sets of tools and methodologies and then finally bond out the chip and solder it onto the board. The three systems, Chip-Package-System have become so interrelated that everything needs to be concurrently designed. The situation only gets worse once thru-silicon-vias and interposer and true 3D designs are considered.

There are a large number of different issues that come together. The most obvious is various aspects of power, primarily getting the power into the package and distributed across the chip and then getting the heat out again, while also accounting for how the variation in temperature will affect performance. Increasingly, in a modern SoC, everything affects everything else. The temperature goes up which affects the performance which affects the power which affects the temperature.

The leader in having technology for handling this has been Apache. In fact the growth of importance of CPS and the need to adopt a much more formal analysis approach has been one of the drivers of Apache’s revenues and, clearly, one reason that Ansys acquired them.

Apache has a lot of technology in this area and historically it has required trawling their website to pull together everything that you might need. And maybe even going to the Ansys site too. But now everything is in one place the ANSYS/Apache CPS subweb:

  • CPS methodology
  • CPS education
  • CPS new & information
  • CPS blogs
  • CPS user group

If you are interested (and you pretty much have to be if you are doing any of this stuff) in CPS then this is a great resource center. As a starting point, if you have not already read it there is a white paper Chip-Package-System Convergence: ANSYS and Apache Technologies for an Integrated Methodologythat is a pretty good overview of the area.

Posted on

Ajoy Bose and Hogan: SoC Realization

Ajoy Bose and Hogan: SoC Realization
by Paul McLellan on 08-13-2012 at 6:47 pm
Categories: EDA

Tomorrow night in Sunnyvale at the National Institute of Technology Alumni meeting, Ajoy Bose and Jim Hogan will talk about different aspects of SoC Realization. I’ve been saying for some time that design is changing and the block level is really where the action is. That is the right level to put together a virtual platform so that the software can be developed, and it is increasing the level at which chips are put together. Increasingly a chip is an assembly of blocks of IP and that assembly process is known as SoC Realization.

Ajoy Bose will talk about how SoC Realization is where high-level concepts are refined to implementation readiness. Legacy and third-party IP blocks are chosen and integrated and the overall chip is prepared for back-end implementation. Getting it right at this stage will dramatically reduce implementation challenges and iteration times. “getting it right” during SoC Realization could lead to the creation of new markets and renewed growth for the industry, but first completing the flow and implementing the vision will require the collaboration of many.

Jim Hogan will talk about Making Money from SoC Realization. Jim wants to focus his EDA investments over the next 5 years in SoC Realization. Part of SoC Realization is validating IP quality and functionality, design assembly and IP integration, design data management, power, performance, and area feasibility checks, debug and analysis tools, memory and memory controllers and bare metal software development.

Increasingly chips are designed using IP and software and the methodologies need to change to adapt to this. There is still often an unspoken assumption that chips are designed by creating a lot of RTL and then running it through synthesis, place and route etc but the reality is that most of the design is re-use of existing IP and software customization.

Look at something like Apple’s A5 chip. Most of the area is a dual ARM core and a quad-core Imagination GPU. Yes, I’m sure there is a little Apple secret sauce in there but primarily large IP blocks being hooked together.

Details on the meeting are here. I’m pretty sure you don’t have to be an alumnus/a from NIT India to attend.

Posted on

Interview with Brien Anderson, CAD Engineer

Interview with Brien Anderson, CAD Engineer
by Daniel Payne on 08-13-2012 at 11:15 am
Categories: Cliosoft, EDA

I first met Brien Anderson on LinkedIn because we share common groups and interests, so I decided to interview him and discover how CAD tools enabled IC design at Synpatics, a company with capacitive sensing technology used in smart phones, tablets and touch screens.

Continue reading “Interview with Brien Anderson, CAD Engineer”

Posted on

A Brief History of Semiconductor IP

A Brief History of Semiconductor IP
by Daniel Nenni on 08-12-2012 at 7:00 pm
Categories: IP

It is important to note that the System On Chip (SoC) revolution that is currently driving mobile electronics has one very important enabling technology and that is Semiconductor Intellectual Property. Where would we be without the $6B+ commercial semiconductor IP market segment? Computers and phones would still be on our desks for one thing. Semiconductor IP; soft cores, hard cores, physical IP, interface IP, etc… not only reduce the cost and time to market of SoCs, it also dramatically raises the innovation bar.

One of the most interesting and enabling things about the semiconductor IP market segment is the business model that has evolved so I’m going to focus on that. Correct me if I’m wrong here but this is how I remember it.

One of the key enablers for the semiconductor IP market segment was process migration. I remember working with Sagantec in the late 1990’s, their DREAM layout migration tool not only moved IP to new process nodes, it also migrated many different types of IP to multiple foundries including standard cells, embedded memories, and custom IP blocks. One of Sagantec’s biggest customers was Intel who migrated x86 processors down the process road map for multiple generations. This migration technology, IMHO, was one of the catalysts for the semiconductor IP revolution that we are experiencing today.

The other catalyst was the economic downturn of the 1990’s. Semiconductor companies jettisoned internal IP groups to cut costs. These engineers later became IP companies providing products and services to the executives that cut them. Artisan Components and Virage Logic are two of the most notable but there were literally hundreds of others. Both Artisan and Virage were Sagantec migration customers by the way.

While enabling the commercial IP market, layout migration technology also limited the migration tools’ total available market. Standard cells for example; Artisan would build one standard cell library for TSMC and migrate it to multiple foundries and process nodes virtually eliminating internal standard cell library development at semiconductor companies. Virage Logic did the same for SRAMs and many other companies followed suit in other semiconductor IP market segments.

Unfortunately, the IP market got very crowded and ASPs dropped quickly from $1M to $50k for a standard cell library forcing a business model change. Artisan Components gets full credit for this one in my book, they changed from an upfront licensing model to a royalty model backed by the foundries. Seriously, what once cost $1M was now free to customers with a royalty paid to the IP companies by the foundries based on wafer sales. ARM ended up buying Artisan for $900M and Synopsys bought Virage Logic for $350M. The royalty based IP business model was certainly behind these “healthy” valuations, absolutely.

Not to be held hostage by overly aggressive royalty demands, foundries started internal IP development as a complimentary service to promote design starts and wafer sales. Today TSMC has the largest commercial IP catalog and silicon validation program enabling semiconductor IP companies around the world. The TSMC IP effort is industry leading with hundreds of millions of dollars invested in the fabless semiconductor design enablement ecosystem.

ARM has done a similar transformation of the microprocessor market blindsiding even the mightiest of semiconductor companies Intel Corporation. ARM also enabled the SoC revolution with a more balanced business model of upfront license fees, royalty revenue from every chip sold by customers incorporating ARM IP, and revenues from related development tools and customer support. Today the resulting ARM ecosystem is second to none which makes the David and Goliath battle against Intel for mobile, laptop, and cloud SoCs a fair fight.

A Brief History of Semiconductors
A Brief History of ASICs
A Brief History of Programmable Devices
A Brief History of the Fabless Semiconductor Industry
A Brief History of TSMC
A Brief History of EDA
A Brief History of Semiconductor IP
A Brief History of SoCs

Posted on

A Brief History of SPICE

A Brief History of SPICE
by Daniel Payne on 08-10-2012 at 4:06 pm
Categories: EDA

SPICE is an acronym for Simulation Program with Integrated Circuit Emphasis and represents a class of EDA software used by circuit designers at the transistor-level to predict the timing, frequency, voltage, current or power of an IC or interconnect before fabrication.

In 1971 there was a tool called CANCER (Computer Analysis of Nonlinear Circuits, Excluding Radiation) from Laurence Nagel while studying under Professor Ronald Rohrer. SPICE was then developed at UC Berkeley by Nagel in 1972 and first announced on April 12, 1973 by Professor Donald Pederson at the 16th Midwest Symposium on Circuity Theory. Continue reading “A Brief History of SPICE”

Posted on

Qualcomm Acquires Intel’s Playbook

Qualcomm Acquires Intel’s Playbook
by Ed McKernan on 08-10-2012 at 12:00 pm
Categories: Arm, Foundries, Intel Foundry

The Mobile Tsunami wave has yet to crest and the surfers strong enough to mount it are dwindling fast to the dismay of market watchers and experienced analysts. The distraction of these past few days is the courtroom drama being played out between the sumo wrestlers, Apple and Samsung, which in the end will not result in a cessation of the Mobile World War. In the background though is a much more interesting battle that is taking place between Intel and Qualcomm. Intel’s game plan is set while Qualcomm rushes to take advantage of open field opportunities. The latest announcement that Qualcomm has hired Intel’s ex-mobile chief Anand Chandrasekher signals an important shift for the communications leader.

The Mobile Tsunami market, which I claim includes Smartphones, tablets andmobile PCs is such a large and growing pie that on first thoughts one could say that there is room for many players to enjoy the spoils. When I was at Transmeta, the CEO would say all we need is 10% of Intel’s x86 market and we will be worth $15B. We didn’t execute at Intel’s cadence and we were rolled. Intel could have been generous and spotted us 10% but it would have disappeared at the next process node. It is important to point out that the larger the market, the more fronts you have to play in and do so competitively to win. Intel is already geared to play in every segment and Qualcomm is not due to their lack of an x86 solution. Going forward though I contend that Intel, Qualcomm, Apple and Samsung are the only players that have the wherewithal on the semiconductor side to build in all segments.

Nvidia just reported their quarterly earnings. Sales were $1.04B up $80M from last quarter. Next quarter sales are to increase by another $100M – $200M. That’s all very nice, now pick up your bat and glove and jump on the next bus to the minor leagues. Neither AMD nor nVidia are scaling their businesses at the rate of Mobile Tsunami and so the undertow will take them out to sea. Perhaps if Broadcom bought nVidia, then the combined company could be a player, given Broadcom’s communications strength and nVidia’s graphics capability. But time is a wasting!

By hiring Anand Chandrasekher, Qualcomm has taken a step that seems to signify that they are about to broaden their focus to include mobile PCs with x86 processors running Windows (yes it will be around for eternity). Intel acquired Infineon’s communications group last year for the purpose of selling the entire platform in PCs, smartphones and tablets. Baseband is the key value added function as we will see with the rollout of 4G LTE this fall. It is a technology that will be available in ultrabooks some time soon. If played right it can exceed the value of Intel’s x86 processors in mobiles.

Anand has in his head the x86 mobile roadmaps, as they existed when he left Intel in May 2011 as well as the understanding of how to fight and win in the mobile PC market. Intel lawyers, no doubt, have sent a nice letter to Anand and Qualcomm stating that Anand must not share any proprietary data in his new work. Don’t worry, the Qualcomm folks will figure out ways to ask questions that hint at the right road to take. Anand, would it be best if we took the road to the left or right today? Mobile Tsunami is about winning in all fronts and Qualcomm knows they have the upper hand with 4G LTE. The demand is so great that they are scrambling to get supply in place to meet demand. The tapeouts to four different Fabs is a sign that they need a massive step ramp on today’s and future products. In addition, they need to be able to negotiate lower wafer pricing with TSMC. It is the alternative to writing a $5B check ahead of time.

However, they can’t rest with just the ARM based Snapdragon. They need to put in place an x86 + 4G LTE product family in order to take Intel’s high mobile ASP advantage away from them and to increase their presence and revenue in a segment that will represent roughly 250MU in three years. It is not, as most have guessed a battle of x86 vs. ARM that determines the winner rather it is an entire mobile platform battle and both processors will coexist. That’s why as an investment strategy investors may decide to own both going forward.

Full Disclosure: I am Long AAPL, INTC, ALTR, QCOM. This article is not a recommendation to buy any stocks mentioned above or in any other one of my postings. Investors must do their own research.

Posted on

While you’re reading the SoC manual

While you’re reading the SoC manual
by Don Dingee on 08-09-2012 at 8:30 pm
Categories: EDA, IP, Siemens EDA

There was a day, not too long ago, when a software developer could be intimate with a processor through understanding its register set. Before coding, developers would reach for a manual, digging through pages and pages of 1s and 0s with defined functions to find how to gain control over the processor and its capability. One bit set or cleared in the right place could be the key to making an application work.

Leaps in processor performance and increases in memory size made hand-crafted code less important, and high level languages took hold as a way to increase coding productivity. Developers graduated from bit-twiddling I/O to more sophisticated functions like disk storage and networking stacks and GUIs, and the real-time operating system emerged with code to set up and manage peripherals.

Peripherals started to coalesce on functional standards like USB and SATA, reducing the variety of interfaces programmers had to deal with. Standardized interfaces like PCI and PCI Express and RapidIO further abstracted the peripheral, seamlessly extending the processor beyond the boundaries of its local bus while allowing complex functions to be added.

Then, a funny thing happened: the system-on-chip (SoC) movement took all the exposed functions developers were used to, glued them together and buried them deep inside a complex beast of a chip. While this drove an incredible revolution in size and performance, it has made a nightmare for developers to really optimize their execution environment, accounting for all the capability an SoC presents. In many cases, the IP blocks inside an SoC are black-boxes to developers who hope beyond hope to get a driver that works for an operating system.

While it’s still possible to figure out programming an SoC, excavating into what in some cases is over 2000 pages of documentation for the part not to mention docs for the operating system, it all takes precious time. Developers have to be experts on their application, and smaller departments have little hope of time left over to develop a deep understanding of the SoC inside. This used to be a gap the board vendors would fill, in taking an operating system and creating a board support package with the drivers packaged together. As the value-add of a board vendor working with an SoC diminishes, fewer board vendors are interested, and this task is swinging back to the semiconductor and operating system firms.

In practice today, that’s the only hope for applications running on SoCs: a tight relationship between the semiconductor company and the operating system company that produces abstracted and optimized support for the myriad of functions inside. Otherwise, developers have to be experts on processor cores, caching and MMU operation, graphics, networking, storage, USB, DSP, audio, compression, encryption, and more functions. That’s a 7 or 8 dollar figure effort for a large project, and it’s impossible for projects with typically embedded volumes of a couple thousand.

This new model is taking shape in quite a few places, but perhaps nowhere as broadly as Mentor Graphics. This week, Mentor announced up-to-date support for 42 embedded SoC boards on their RTOS and Linux environments (proving the answer to the universe and everything embedded is actually 42). The philosophy is Mentor’s embedded software teams live with the SoC vendors at the front end, so you don’t have to in order to get a solid starting point for software. Again, they’re not unique in this type of effort, but the range of relationships and architecture support Mentor is putting together is impressive.

You can still read the SoC manual, if you have time. Seriously, what are your views? Is this type of support for SoCs valuable, or can a development team with enough caffeine still do without it? Does open source (read: free) provide enough, or is value-added support worth a reasonable expenditure? Do you know of an example where this type of integrated, value-added support boosted productivity and got a project done faster than thought possible? Or saved a project that got in trouble?

(Disclaimer: Been away a while, long story, happy to be writing again)


Posted on

The GLOBALFOUNDRIES Value Proposition!

The GLOBALFOUNDRIES Value Proposition!
by Daniel Nenni on 08-09-2012 at 5:00 pm
Categories: Foundries, GlobalFoundries

From the very start I continually asked the GF guys what their value proposition is other than, “We are not TSMC”, which seems to be the easy way to foundry riches but clearly is not. In the early days of GF there was a lot of pride, pomp, and circumstance but that does not necessarily sell wafers. Today we are seeing a very different GF focused on implementation and increased transparency which leads to the most important business asset today, trust!

The Foundry Files Blog is a new feature on the GF website which I’m happy to promote. Blogging is an opportunity for companies to be transparent and represent themselves as real people and build trust within their business environment.

To start, Michael Noonan and Mojy Chian will be blogging. Mike is Executive Vice President, Worldwide Marketing and Sales, for GLOBALFOUNDRIES. In this role, he is responsible for global customer relationships as well as all marketing, sales, customer engineering and quality functions. Read more about Mike here. Mojy is Senior Vice President, Design Enablement at GLOBALFOUNDRIES. He is responsible for global design enablement, services, and solutions and is the primary technical customer interface for the company. Read more about Mojy here.

I first met Mike when he was with NXP and before that he was with National Semiconductor. I first met Mojy at Conexant and worked with him again at Altera. Please recognize that these gentlemen are industry leaders and this is a VERY important communication channel for the greater good of the semiconductor ecosystem so please take advantage of this very unique opportunity.

I blogged about Mojy’s first entry Re-defining Collaboration on SemiWiki HERE. This blog is about Mike’s entry Execution, Innovation, Location: 3 Reasons to Choose GLOBALFOUNDRIES at 28nm.

Execution is obvious, you need to ship wafers and they are doing that today shipping more than 250,000 32nm and 28nm HKMG wafers:

“In just one quarter, we were able to see more than a doubling of yields on 32nm, allowing us to exit 2011 having exceeded our 32nm product shipment requirements. Based on this successful ramp of 32nm HKMG, we are committed to moving ahead on 28nm with GLOBALFOUNDRIES.” AMD CEO Rory Read.

Innovation is key and here is what Mike has to say about innovation and their 28nm:

  • ~100 percent density increase.
  • Up to 50 percent increased speed and 50 percent reduction in energy/switch.
  • Sustains 40nm layout style advantages: Bi-directional Poly, Poly Jogs, Large Caps.
  • ~20% smaller die relative to 28nm “Gate Last.”

Location is an interesting part of the value proposition and one worth more discussion. Now that GLOBALFOUNDRIES is the second largest pure-play foundry in the world with manufacturing plants located in Europe, Asia, and North America, is location important? You tell me. Why does Intel, the number one semiconductor company, have fabs all over the world? Why is Samsung, the number two semiconductor company, building fabs in North America and China? Location, location, location……

Posted on

Smartphones: Is It Game Over?

Smartphones: Is It Game Over?
by Paul McLellan on 08-08-2012 at 4:18 pm
Categories: General

The Q2 numbers for smartphones are now all in and the basic story is that Google is now registering an incredible million Android phones per day, half of them made by Samsung. That’s 85% of all the smartphones shipped last quarter. Android has (per IDC) 68% market share of all smartphones out there.

Apple grew by double digit numbers but was slightly off the numbers that analysts expected. But with a new iPhone expected later this quarter this is pretty typical. Apple is currently #2 with 17% of smartphones (but also with an outsized share of the revenues and profits). Remember, iPhone is bigger than all of Microsoft, amazingly, and twice as big as Google.

So Samsung and Apple make all the profits in the wireless market.

What about everyone else? HTC, missed its numbers very badly. RIM (Blackberry), still struggling with shrinking market share and its new operating system not out until January of next year which seems like an eternity from now. Nokia/Microsoft still not selling much although the new WP8 phones are expected late this quarter or early next. Huawei (who managed to be the cover story on this week’s Economist) seemed to do ok in China but nowhere else. LG is being crushed by Samsung pretty much, it seems.

I’m still unclear just how clever Google’s strategy is. Yes, they are doing everything they can to make sure nobody gets between them and the end user, experimentally putting fiber networks in Kansas city, bidding on wireless spectrum, giving away a wireless operating system for free, buying their own handset company. Then hoping to get everything back and more from AdWords, which is really the only Google business that makes real money. Also, apart from Samsung, all their other Android customers are struggling to make any money.

Apple also seems to have mindshare of App developers too. Security on Android seems to be much more of a problem. Apple is certainly open to criticism for some aspects of its AppStore acceptance process but it does seem to keep a lot of dubious stuff out. And App developers apparently make more money on iPhone than Android where people expect the Apps to have the same price as the operating system and be free. Even Rovio has to give Angry Birds away on Android but sells all except a few introductory levels on iPhone.

If Apple does release iPhone5 this quarter as expected then this quarter will see a big leap in iPhone sales since it is clear that at least some people are postponing iPhone sales for now. Unlike Apple’s strategy of just releasing one phone per year (Apple’s entire product line would fit on a large table), Samsung has an enormous line of phones. In addition to Android, they have Tizen which is their own Linux-based operating system jointly developed with Intel. Nokia were heavily involved in the project with their Meego operating system until Elop switched Nokia to all Microsoft Windows Phone. They even still have some Microsoft WP phones although it will be interesting to see if they continue to do so.

Samsung and Apple are clearly taking all the money and it is questionable how long anyone else will be able to survive. A good rule of thumb is that if you double your volume your costs go down by 20-30%. My guess: Samsung and Apple will pull away from everyone else. Huawei will do OK in China where it is partially protected. There will be a big bloodbath of everyone else. It reminds me of the endgame in the PC market. Remember Gateway, PackardBell, Compaq, IBM Thinkpad. The weak were eaten by the strong: HP, Acer and Lenovo.

And those Samsung Apple lawsuits? I don’t think they will change much other than making a bunch of lawyers rich. UPDATE: although you can watch Samsung spokesperson Stephan Jobes defend themselves here!