Limpkin's blog - Tag - Cadence - Comments<div>An electronics geek blog, dedicated to sharing and open source. Check out my stores: <a href="https://lectronz.com/stores/stephanelec" hreflang="en" title="Lectronz store">EU</a> / <a href="https://www.tindie.com/stores/stephanelec" hreflang="en" title="tindie store">EU & US</a>.</div>2024-03-29T00:41:47+00:00Mathieuurn:md5:51de6a3d917257edeff5a252fe925b02DotclearAltium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - Frustratedurn:md5:24bef2750956ed032e84e3a298e791262016-07-09T18:48:59+02:002016-07-09T17:48:59+02:00Frustrated<p>I am into my fourth month (yes months, not day or week) trying to get my first pcb layed out with 3D visualisations. I am the only one in our company working on Altium full time and hence I have to rely on forums and telephone calls to the local Altium office. The people at Altium have been very helpful but never before have I had to spend this amount of time on a package before I can see any reasonable results.</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - limpkinurn:md5:c02788ab4621e5b85a31f7168d781de52016-02-16T12:23:48+01:002016-02-16T12:25:42+01:00limpkin<p>@<a href="http://www.limpkin.fr/index.php?post/2012/07/17/Altium-vs-Cadence%3A-a-totally-subjective-opinion#c9750" rel="ugc nofollow">matty</a> : Hey Matty, about BGAs: actually less than 3 minutes as there are tools to quickly make such kind of footprints. After all you just need the grid size, number of balls and ball pad. I agree with you that on complex designs 3D is extremely important.</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - mattyurn:md5:680cbd4286a4a83cf7c363bae8c88f2c2016-02-16T00:55:38+01:002016-02-16T00:55:38+01:00matty<p>3 minutes to draw a component? What about a large BGA component with hundreds of pins? I fail to see how you could draw that in 3 minutes. Also, the 3D aspect is very important. Have you ever had to do a thermal analysis or a frequency analysis on a PCB? It is important that the ECAD software can talk to MCAD. Even if you don't need that, do you realise how much better your designators are placed if you do it in 3D on Altium? I have no experience with Cadence and I'm not bagging it, I just think you make some broad brush statements in your analysis.</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - MikeAurn:md5:e6030c241dcb0b76ceaeabd65cafeac92015-08-12T15:52:15+02:002015-08-12T18:14:04+02:00MikeA<p>I've been using Protel and Altium for almost 18 years with a brief stint in Zuken. In the beginning polygon repours would take hours, by 2009 it only took minutes but still enough time to get a cup of coffee. In Altium 15 polygon pours are very fast. I have repoured every polygon on a 12 layer 8"x11" board in under 30 seconds.<br />
As for 3D, since 2009 we have used a STEP model for every part in our library. By using an accurate 3D model and Altium's 3D engine we have been able to get real time 3D clearances during placement. I can place a small SMT component under a connector and know it will fit within my clearance rules.</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - DougBurn:md5:8f154558e6862d2eb98dd2c0b88328e42015-01-09T22:30:35+01:002015-01-10T12:29:43+01:00DougB<p>I've been using Altium (Protel, et.al) for 14 years and my biggest gripe is The Bugs! Many that have been around for at least 14 years. Altium seems to be a company, like Computer Associates and how Microsoft used to be, that is more interested in adding new features/bells/whistles than making a solid product. About every 10th time I start up the program something has disappeared or changed in the interface and I have to go hunting to recover it - when I do a re-annotate on the schematic and import to the PCB it looses track of tons of nets, recently - I run a DRC and it doesn't report any problems while there are still a bunch of unconnected nets (and yes, the DRC is set up correctly). I could go on and on and ...</p>
<p>If they just took the time to fix the fundamental bugs, fix a couple of architecture issues (e.g., losing nets after re-annotation), make the user / commands more orthogonal and intuitive, and provide better (not necessary voluminous) documentation and help search, they would have a great product.</p>
<p>Thanks for listening to my rant.<br />
Doug</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - alireza latifurn:md5:18d30cecdb7341d72a0cf1394533ed712014-05-27T17:38:19+02:002014-05-28T13:33:04+02:00alireza latif<p>Greetings<br />
I am fluent in both 2 software<br />
The altium Multi Brdpy pcb sheet is faster and more accurately<br />
Thanks</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - Manjiturn:md5:e39177b8228ec0ebd4a599c764bd51482014-03-04T16:11:58+01:002014-03-11T11:00:40+01:00Manjit<p>For larger designs I use Orcad 16.6 (nicer 3D now with STEP model mapping though slow preview)! Yes configuration and component creation can take some time but once you have it figured out it...</p>
<p>For small projects I use Proteus 8.</p>
<p>Free tools:</p>
<p>DIPTrace is cool for small designs and very cheap for bigger paid versions!</p>
<p>For serial communications testing with micros - you can't beat SimpleTerm Gold Starter Lite (free) and paid for version rarely use.</p>
<p>Get the job done with the tool you are comfortable with depending on your task.</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - Mohamadrezaurn:md5:e80bf7edde58e18ab52c8bbde1ecf65d2014-01-12T07:41:31+01:002014-01-12T16:39:40+01:00Mohamadreza<p>Your article is so interesting....<br />
I think Altium is better for visual things and Allegro is better for dedicated tools to design advanced board i mean high speed boards.</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - cactusurn:md5:902cceb841dc5cfbacea5cbea08bab9c2013-12-19T04:56:39+01:002013-12-22T21:32:21+01:00cactus<p>I have to agree with what sonicsmooth says about cadence allegro i myself can't get Orcad to export any kind of netlist Allegro can import ( Logic ) I have a help request in about this and will probably get a timely answer in a couple DAYS !!</p>
<p>I am a 15 year PADS user. the library is easy and the decal editor is easy AND you can add or delete nets from the layout tool dangerous maybe but fast.<br />
Importing DXF is also easy and putting it where you want on the layout and in the library is easy. One bad thing I don't know how to put holes or vias in a decal without them being a terminal.</p>
<p>I'm probably die before I get Allegro figured out</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - sonicsmoothurn:md5:00ec31a19a34f4cab769cd5e4a8801d32013-10-15T08:03:44+02:002013-10-15T07:29:35+02:00sonicsmooth<p>Over the past several years I've been exposed to Altium and Allegro. I got pretty good at Altium and have been able to either workaround or ignore the annoyances. i think it's getting too bulky, has too many FPGA and compiler features nobody ever uses, and doing simple things like copying/pasting/moving vias are annoying. I also ignore the 4GB of libraries since literally they have nothing I need, and it takes a few moments to create my own components. I don't want a "vault" or "my altium" or any of that. But in terms of just figuring stuff out, it's pretty easy. I could easily imagine a more productive layout experience, but I've mostly done smallish boards. Despite Altium's annoyances, its discoverability is really good and in keeping with my post-1995 computer interaction expectations. I was able to learn Altium from a few PDFs. Its polygon editing features are annoying, and it has plenty of other quirks, but overall I don't feel like a retard using it.</p>
<p>With Allegro, however, after several years of trying to *casually* learn the tool between endless meetings and other workaday interruptions, I still have no idea how to take an Orcad schematic and bring it into the tool. Seriously. The conceptual leap from standard Windows-based tools is pretty large. I don't "get" how the tool works. There are endless config files at each level of the tool, from libs, padstacks, "symbols", comps, dxf conversion files, idf, colors, palettes, filters, lists, etc. I really don't know what I'm talking about, but this is what I see, and is in many ways a metaphoric mimicry of the sounds I hear in a foreign language. In the same way that Charlie Brown's kitchen expertise is limited to cold cereal and maybe some toast, my Allegro expertise, after several years of exposure in which I hoped some knowledge would diffuse through my thick skull, is the ability to move and delete components, import an EMN file (oh, sorry, import through IDF menu, whoops, I shoulda known), then export to DXF, oh, wait, I need to set up a conversion file, click three buttons, and hope the version i have doesn't have a bug. PDF? Sorry, you need a separate license for that, asshole. In fact I can't usually tell the difference between a bug and my lack of knowledge or just an unimplemented or "teaser" feature they decided to add the menu. (BTW I had a similar hate-cadence experience ~10 years ago in analog IC design world -- lots of unimplemened menu items and interface (java/non-java) inconsistencies, as though Cadence loves to leave you blue-balled after paying through the nose for a polygon-pusher; where's the "automation" part<acronym>). When I want to cancel a command (has anyone at cadence ever read the principles of stateless user interface design</acronym>) I cannot just hit escape. I have to right click then pick either cancel or "oops". I mean WTF? This is a >>$10k tool suite. Even Microsoft of famed Clippy or Bob doesn't say "oops". Also there are many times when I'm trying to use the arrow keys to move around, and the console window just says "right right right right esc esc esc esc fuck!" The only out is to hit enter. I think this is the only tool in the existence of the planet that captures arrow keys and prints them out. Finally, it sucks ass with most of my wireless microsoft mice. No matter which direction I turn the scroll wheel, it always zooms out. Doesn't happen with all wireless mice, or with wired mice. Does any other tool figure out how to fuck up a SCROLL_EVENT? So although the Altium curve may be steep, it's not a brick wall like Allegro, with every waking moment causing me to want to throw the computer out the window.</p>
<p>So basically we have other board people do the real layouts, and the rest of us with lives to squander just take a look using Free Viewer.</p>
<p>And don't even get me started on LMTools....</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - Richurn:md5:2947de619e049d3e1dc66315500af3e62013-09-17T01:25:40+02:002013-09-18T14:23:44+02:00Rich<p>Also,</p>
<p>Can I add a note on 3D view functionality and it's usefulness<br />
I have used this feature (of Diptrace) to check the dimensions of a PCB in an enclosure (using Sketchup).</p>
<p>Also, it is a very valuable tool when designing for a customer, to show them the product in 3D.. using a free VRML viewer I can email them the 3D file and get feedback.</p>
<p>The 3D function of Diptrace is Low-tech and quick. Just how I like it.<br />
However I do have to convert 3D component modules to VRML format first.</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - richurn:md5:ccd5b9b00b6210f2596c05be2b8546a02013-09-17T01:16:30+02:002013-09-18T14:23:45+02:00rich<p>Hi,</p>
<p>I notice you don't mention diptrace in the above.<br />
I run an electronics business and design aproximately one new product per month.</p>
<p>I have always used diptrace.</p>
<p>When I tried one of the tools you mention (I wont name it), I found it difficult to do the main design tasks: PCB routing and layout, 3D visualization. (It took me one hour to become proficient in Diptrace). I really enjoy designing electronics. And I find it frustrating when these expensive bulky tools force designers to think more about the tool rather than the design. So, If you have an hour spare, try to design a circuit and layout a PCB (1 to 16 layers) in diptrace.</p>
<p>Also do a rule check, you will find a quick and intuitive default rule check, that requires no time to setup.</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - John Smithurn:md5:dcff1730ff63f423ea4b822913afa4312012-12-29T07:40:48+01:002012-12-29T21:04:11+01:00John Smith<p>Limpkin, I dont mind too much that each padstack is in its own file. As a old P-CAD Dos user that is how it was done way back. The downside to this from the perspective of a new or seasoned user is. Each padstack has to be named so you know what it means for example 60R-33 which would be a 60 mil round padstack with a 33 mil hole, now thats not too bad for a throug-hole hole but for smd pads it can be a pain in the butt : )</p>
<p>Most of the newer pcb cad tools intergrate the creation of the padstacks with the actual footprint which makes for easy footprint creation but the downside of this is one might not be able to change a pad on the fly.</p>
<p>Someone mentioned earlier that the Orcad product is not Allegro, it is indeed Allegro. Same interface same everything except they have removed some of the high-speed rules from the lower end package that they call Orcad.</p>
<p>If you are new to PCB design Allegro may not be for you but if you look at most of the large boards such as computer mother-boards they are getting designed with Allegro or Mentor. Very few large designs are been designed with Altiumn IMHO.</p>
<p>The graphis sub-system in Altium cannot handle large copper pours, it becomes a pig.</p>
<p>If you are after graphics speed then the open Gl based graphics of Allegro cant be beat.</p>
<p>Thanks John</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - ralphnKCurn:md5:8a677c4f38c52ba09ead057824ae0dcf2012-12-18T22:40:40+01:002012-12-19T17:07:06+01:00ralphnKC<p>From a "LONG TIME" pads user. The Altium toolset is now approaching the ease of use that pads has had for a long time. The 'new' version of pads is forcing many to step back and re-evaluate their tool sets. I see many using Orcad for schematic and Altium for PCB layout. Is that a route that any here have a comment on??</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - curse_murn:md5:aceae913678dfcb7a0066fd97edee65a2012-12-14T07:05:15+01:002012-12-14T11:01:54+01:00curse_m<p>Hi, I am a typical Altium user, but in last days i have the need to use also Orcad. So i had spent a lot of time to look it(I had started originally with very old Orcad, but then i migrated to Protel99 which was definitely better then). Now with Allegro i see Orcad had become much more user friendly, but yet i consider Altium for me more comfortable overall. Of course every program has small things we do not like, but things I do not like in Orcad are more.</p>
<pre>By the way, importing pcb project to altium is pretty easy and working almost fine, just it is strongly advisable to import also with the pcb the orcad footprint library. I had looked also older version of Orcad 15.7 and definitely there altium 6 is much much better in user interface...(with altium 10 there is no use to compare)
So with this short words, i again convinced myself during the years altium was the better choice. but who knows, in future things may change, i see quite a grow in Allegro Orcad 16.6.</pre>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - limpkinurn:md5:019bab339eacb4341f948ea8b5f90ef52012-12-03T11:52:21+01:002012-12-03T11:54:49+01:00limpkin<p>@<a href="https://www.limpkin.fr/index.php?post/2012/07/17/Altium-vs-Cadence%3A-a-totally-subjective-opinion#c729" rel="ugc nofollow">John Smith</a> : It's interesting you mention that, because it is exactly what I love about allegro :). I like to know that each padstack/chip is a separate file on my computer that I can pick for another project.</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - Kentxuurn:md5:f59271fb850458ca259241e986818b4d2012-11-28T12:52:09+01:002012-12-02T13:44:39+01:00Kentxu<p>Thanks for the useful blog and comments!</p>
<p>After starting many years ago on Protel, then moved to Veribest and now have been using Allergo for quite some time (Let's not confuse Allegro with OrCad layout, they're both Cadence, but completely different: Allegro works, but it is not cheap).</p>
<p>Now I'm moving back to Protel in its new form; Altium, and finding it quite powerful for queries and lists, but very annoying for it's clunky interactive routing engine. And yes, that pop-up which asks what you want to select is idiotic! Especially when routing under a big BGA it always asks if I want to move the BGA, duh! Plus a track should snap to the centre of a via, and I'm tired of deleting bits and pieces of track when I change something.</p>
<p>But here's the real gripe: I'm working on a DDR layout and have to lenght match the traces. Here there are often several chips on one address bus resulting in a "T", and you need to match each leg of the T. Allegro does this well with pin-to-pin rules and also allows inclusion of the Package Pin Lenght. Altium... well let's just say that I was very glad to find a video and spread sheet by 'Fedevel' showing how to do it (thanks for that Robert!), but again the process is very clunky. And when it comes to signal integrity? forget it!</p>
<p>It would be great if Altium left out the FPGA support stuff (we're going to use Xilinx's or Atera's own software for that!), and concentrate on good routing and high speed support...</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - John Smithurn:md5:51f0ae69c9409c01ab2d24d32e3863352012-11-27T00:05:06+01:002012-12-02T13:45:09+01:00John Smith<p>Hello, Your blog is interesting and was a good read but there are some glaring ommisions with respect to Allegro that I would like to point out.</p>
<p>1 Setup time on Allegro is Horrible. The learning curve is difficult. To be productive on day 1 or day 30 with Allegro PCB editor is a serious stretch. The biggest hurdles a designer will face are.</p>
<p>Figuring out the layer structure of the entities that compose a footprint.<br />
Defining colors for layers. BTW all your color settings get blown away if you do not<br />
save them to a parameters file : )<br />
DRC has endless settings.<br />
Paths to symbols,Padstacks have to be defined otherwise a user will never be able to package a design from the schematic.</p>
<p>Basically everything in Allegro has to be configured out of the box where by competing tools have the basics covered and are easy enough for the end user to<br />
know what button to push.</p>
<p>Allegro does not have any library managment Period. If a user wants to look at their PCB footprints they have to open the pcb editor and then open the .dra symbol. This can become a huge task because each "Symbol" is kept in a folder and not a database so a user has to open each symbol to just browse their symbols. BTW footprints are called symbols in Allegro.. That one is hard to believe :)</p>
<p>Padstacks are kept seperate too, there is a padstack utility to allow you to browse your padstacks but there is no "Preview" of what your padstack looks like.</p>
<p>Library management and padstack management are basically a Joke in Allegro.</p>
<p>Now putting aside the setup time involved with Allegro and some of it's weaker features it is a serious PCB editor. It can basically do anything but the price of admission is you have to take the time to learn it. Once you do it will be one of the best PCB editors you have ever used.</p>
<p>Allegro's strong points are. V16.5 X</p>
<p>High speed routing and net rules.<br />
Interactive Routing.<br />
Extremely Fast graphics Display. "Zero lag"<br />
Shapes or the ability to create and merge complex polygons with ease.<br />
Reports, such as net, bom, drc, Pretty much endless list.<br />
Highly configurable "Comes at the learning curve price of admission"</p>
<p>Things that will drive you insane</p>
<p>No real nested commands. Assume you want to move a component and then route a pin. You have to select each operation to do each action. I..E move component then click add route. Other tools combine common actions such as this Allegro does not.</p>
<p>Configuring all the settings : )</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - Peeteurn:md5:a1f111d7745ce14e9fd4ab5dc02ad5ba2012-11-09T00:01:30+01:002012-11-09T10:09:27+01:00Peete<p>Well i agree with most of you guys, Altium Designer doesnt have the ease of use of Allegro, Pads or Expedition PCB. I have used a few tools and i still prefer the Mentor graphics programs, too bad they are pricing themselves out of the market.</p>
<p>I would recomend Altium to people laying out motor controller pcb's and such, but the control you have over planes and routing isnt great so dont use it for designs where you need more control over routing like under fine pitch BGA devices. Altium has its market. Lets hope they work on updating their legacy dependant user interface.</p>Altium vs Cadence: a totally subjective opinion - pcbpinoyurn:md5:adf25521a692325fcffa59b9d5acd42e2012-09-28T03:52:33+02:002012-09-28T09:41:40+02:00pcbpinoy<p>Moving from PADS to Altium on my part was a pain in the @$$. There was a paradign shift to say the least. The learning curve was tooo challenging that I was learning Altium by myself referencing from forums. I design industrial boards (ATE) with 20-30 layers and we have design methodologies that are different to commercial boards out there. I was unhappy with the time it took Altium to repour my copper planes whether they are negative por positive planes. PADS do it in less than a minute while Altium does it 100x or more.</p>
<p>I won't recommend Altium at all even if it is of lower cost compared to PADS or Allegro. You get what you pay for, if you know what I mean.</p>