News & Analysis
Comment
iniewski
KB3001
The cycle might take longer, Peter, but we will inevitably hit a standardisation ...
Is Synopsys helping chip making return to its roots?
Peter Clarke
8/3/2012 7:52 AM EDT
Synopsys reacting to the end of disaggregation?
More recently the fact that relatively fewer companies are prepared to go to the leading edge in IC design at each node has been a growing problem for the EDA companies. It means fewer design starts, fewer big ticket customers, less seats and potentially less revenue to pay for R&D.
And fewer EDA tool buyers means more powerful buyers, perhaps arguing that they don't want insights they are sharing with EDA tool vendors to immediately benefit their rivals. This is what I suspect is driving custom EDA implementation. Synopsys seems to be catching the trend, presumably hoping to turn a problem into an opportunity.
We are starting to see hints that fabless chip companies are thinking about putting money down to at least wrest some control of manufacturing back from the foundries. With fewer players in the field access to leading-edge manufacturing is starting to become an important point of differentiation in some markets.
Whether EDA R&D will ever go back in-house at the chip makers is another matter. It is a low enough cost item – essentially software – that it could, but it does need to be linked to very high capital cost manufacturing and things never quite go back to where they were.
The argument against re-aggregation – the idea that OEMs will develop internal chip companies and that chip companies will take on manufacturing and EDA tasks – is the same one that drove disaggregation in the first place, cost. Sharing R&D amongst a bigger community reduces the cost for all. But it may be that in some spot cases the opportunity benefit of getting an advantage over the competition and winning the bigger prize, makes it worthwhile. That bigger prize could be market share in a fast growing market such as tablet computers.
We are living in the ecosystem era now but not all ecosystem members are created equal. Custom collaborations between narrower groups, down to those as small as one foundry, one chip developer and one EDA provider would represent the partial return of chip making to its roots.
Related links and articles:
Synopsys to buy SpringSoft for $406 million
Synopsys buys EDA vendor Ciranova
Synopsys to buy Magma for $507 million
'Second coming' of Magma forced Synopsys to deal
Silicon 60 v13.0
More recently the fact that relatively fewer companies are prepared to go to the leading edge in IC design at each node has been a growing problem for the EDA companies. It means fewer design starts, fewer big ticket customers, less seats and potentially less revenue to pay for R&D.
And fewer EDA tool buyers means more powerful buyers, perhaps arguing that they don't want insights they are sharing with EDA tool vendors to immediately benefit their rivals. This is what I suspect is driving custom EDA implementation. Synopsys seems to be catching the trend, presumably hoping to turn a problem into an opportunity.
We are starting to see hints that fabless chip companies are thinking about putting money down to at least wrest some control of manufacturing back from the foundries. With fewer players in the field access to leading-edge manufacturing is starting to become an important point of differentiation in some markets.
Whether EDA R&D will ever go back in-house at the chip makers is another matter. It is a low enough cost item – essentially software – that it could, but it does need to be linked to very high capital cost manufacturing and things never quite go back to where they were.
The argument against re-aggregation – the idea that OEMs will develop internal chip companies and that chip companies will take on manufacturing and EDA tasks – is the same one that drove disaggregation in the first place, cost. Sharing R&D amongst a bigger community reduces the cost for all. But it may be that in some spot cases the opportunity benefit of getting an advantage over the competition and winning the bigger prize, makes it worthwhile. That bigger prize could be market share in a fast growing market such as tablet computers.
We are living in the ecosystem era now but not all ecosystem members are created equal. Custom collaborations between narrower groups, down to those as small as one foundry, one chip developer and one EDA provider would represent the partial return of chip making to its roots.
Related links and articles:
Synopsys to buy SpringSoft for $406 million
Synopsys buys EDA vendor Ciranova
Synopsys to buy Magma for $507 million
'Second coming' of Magma forced Synopsys to deal
Silicon 60 v13.0
|
|
|
|
|
Navigate to related information
iniewski
8/3/2012 10:41 AM EDT
As you say Peter there are fewer companies willing or able to buy state-of-the-art million dollar EDA tools..hence your revenue doesn't grow...you have to do something about it...consolidating R&D of various product lines makes sense, I think EDA companies traditionally have spent too much on R&D % wise...Kris
Sign in to Reply
KB3001
8/3/2012 11:20 AM EDT
Reminds me of Makimoto's wave (standardisation and customization alternate every ~10 years). There is a similar trend between disaggregation and reaggregation.
Sign in to Reply
iniewski
8/9/2012 12:19 PM EDT
Feels that way @KB3001...here is an interesting link on Makimoto's wave:
http://www.professormemory.edn.com/blog/professor-memory-blog/makimoto%E2%80%99s-wave
Sign in to Reply
peter.clarke
8/3/2012 11:43 AM EDT
Makimoto's wave gained some credit ability for a while. But as time goes by it seems to me the wave has failed to repeat....the key transition was from building block components that were never application specific... To soc era where all components are app specific.
Not just soc components.
Even DRAM has become an app specific PC memory these days
Sign in to Reply
KB3001
8/4/2012 8:35 PM EDT
The cycle might take longer, Peter, but we will inevitably hit a standardisation phase. Look at how ARM and Co. are developing standards for server solutions, Android is becoming the dominant Mobile OS etc. Certainly it won't be like before where one technology or a few are standardised but it will be about system standardisation with a variety of nodes with standard interfaces.
Sign in to Reply
dylan.mcgrath
8/3/2012 2:08 PM EDT
I read this more as Synopsys aggregating EDA technology and segmenting it from its other business. That makes sense to me. As far as re-aggregating EDA within a large chip vendor, it's an interesting idea, but I don't believe we are close to that point. There are only a handful of chip companies that could realistically buy Synopsys, and I don't believe there is any real motivation for them to do so. When it gets to the point that only one or two firms are scaling to new nodes, then they might be forced to bring EDA in house.
Sign in to Reply