Re: New package model proposal by Steven Peters

Text item:

Fred,

Do I understand you correctly? Are you suggesting that the PCB portion of SIMMs
should be described as if they were packages?

Even though I see the similarities between PCBs and MCMs or other types of
packages, I strongly disagree with your wish to be able to handle SIMMs as if
they were packages. SIMMs are clearly printed circuit boards with multiple
components on them and they should be handled as such. The best way of doing so
is to make full-board simulation tools understand multiple board situations, so
that a motherboard with a SIMM (or more) could be simulated as two or more PCBs
connected together.

As Stephen said, IBIS is a component modeling format and not a PCB description
language.

The question in my mind is whether MCMs and the like should be handled as PCBs,
because from a user's point of view, an MCM package is one piece of something
and from the outside it looks like a single component.

It is true, that vendors have a hard time to release models of their SIMMs. If
you were a SIMM vendor, which format would use to create a model? Quad, xSPICE,
Interconnectix, EDIF, etc...?

As I see it, a generic interconnect description language standard is missing
here, which could be used by any simulation tool. This standard should have the
capabilities to describe PCBs as well as packages, and then it could be used for
SIMMs, motherboards, MCMs, complex packages, etc...

Arpad Muranyi
Intel Corporation,
Folsom, CA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
...
Am I wrong in thinking that some of the more complex packages like 200+ pin BGAs
and PGAs are actualy circuit boards? If they are, then there are a lot of
similarities with SIMMs.

If Steven's Egg will allow manufacturers to provide package information
for SIMMs, I want to nominate him for IBISian of the year, even if that wasn't
his intention. If the Egg won't allow for that level of package information,
why not make it so that it will (provided the user can separate die and package
information when necessary).
...
Regards,
Fred Vance
FirePower Systems, Inc.

Text item: External Message Header

The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.

***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.

Subject: New package model proposal by Steven Peters
To: Ibis@vhdl.org
Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.99.1)
Received: by NeXT.Mailer (1.99.1)
Date: Wed, 10 May 95 10:35:09 -0700
Received: by protocol.FirePower.COM (NX5.67d/NX3.0X)
     id AA02159; Wed, 10 May 95 10:35:09 -0700
Message-Id: <9505101735.AA06079@oahu.FirePower.COM>
From: Fred Vance <fvance@FirePower.COM>
Received: from protocol by oahu.FirePower.COM (NX5.67d/NX3.0M)
     id AA06079; Wed, 10 May 95 10:35:10 -0700
Received: from oahu by FirePower.COM (NX5.67d/NX4.0Mhb.0b)
     id AA25497; Wed, 10 May 95 10:35:11 -0700
Received: from FirePower.COM by vhdl.vhdl.org (4.1/SMI-4.1/BARRNet)
     id AA24123; Wed, 10 May 95 10:40:59 PDT
Received: from vhdl.vhdl.org by hermes.intel.com (5.65/10.0i); Wed, 10 May 95 10
:37:12 -0700
Received: from hermes.intel.com by relay.jf.intel.com with smtp
     (Smail3.1.28.1 #2) id m0s9GM8-000twYC; Wed, 10 May 95 11:19 PDT
Received on Wed May 10 13:20:54 1995