Hello,
In my simulation by using Cadence Spectre running in the command line mode (e.g., call runSimulation with input.scs and extract performance using ocean script), the time analysis is as follows.
For example, one simulation time by using the Spectre simulator is TSim = 4.45s and the time spent in licensing is 3.66s which is 82.3% of TSim. The time for running the SKILL-language-based Ocean script for extracting performance is TOcnExt = 5.5s, and I am not sure if the licensing check is involved in the ocean script execution or not. So, for simulating one netlist and extracting the performance will take TSim + TOcnExt= 9.95s. While in the work:
R. Castro-Lopez, O. Guerra, E. Roca, F. Fernandez, An integrated layout-synthesis approach for analog ICs, IEEE Trans. Comput.-Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst. 27 (7) (2008), 1179 - 1189.
the simulation was run by Hspice (say HspiceD) and was performed on a PentiumIV at 1.3-Hz PC in 2008. Their reported CPU times was 612.31 seconds for 2437 iterations.
So in average, 0.25s/iteration. Such a huge difference. I assume the data from an IEEE transaction level paper is trustable.
If the accuracy of simulation results only rely on the device model included, no simulator is more superior than another. (Maybe Spectre has a more fancy and powerful IDE.) Then why not always using Hspice due to its dominant position in run speed.
Anybody has a knowledge on this?
Kind regards,
Alex