% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Synopsys Inc. Message Board

  • veri_woman veri_woman Jun 4, 1998 4:47 PM Flag


    Wow, it seems there is a war between synopsys and
    chrysalis over formal verification. See E-News 6/1/98. I
    use one of the tools, but I won't tell which

    To settle this independence thing they should square
    off with an Independent AMBIT design (I do use that
    tool ) and let the best tool win.

    But IMHO
    Synopsys is not strong at new technology but I can be

    Formalverification is going to be a big revenue generation in the
    future. Maybe Synopsys should just buy chrysalis

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • >>Are u on drug? or this is your first time
      reading quarterly earning?<<

      Now, now, no
      reason to be insulting. I admit that I get confused at
      times and make mistakes. If I used the wrong EPS I am
      sorry. I ASSumed that since the price fell after
      earnings that it was due to missing estimates and when I
      saw the $0.50 EPS I concluded that that was the
      culprit. I'm not experienced reading financial reports or
      knowing what EPS figure to use. I appologize and I will
      leave further financial analysis of SNPS to


    • Are u on drug? or this is your first time reading

      SNPS beats estimate by 1 cent. The .50 includes the
      related to Viewlogic merges. Excluding the charge,
      came with .53.

      Stocks don't always go up with
      good earnings, look at CHKPF,


    • Simple. EPS estimates for Q3 was $0.52 vs. actual
      reported EPS of $0.50. Price before announced earnings was
      based on $0.52 and whether they would make those
      numbers. Price today was based on $0.50 and how the future
      now looks. Want to see what happens when a stock
      beats EPS estimates -- take a look at what happened to
      QCOM today.


    • For the last 3 weeks, the SNPS trading indicators
      pointed to a down trend. Decreasing trade volumes with
      very slowly declining share price. Something had to
      happen ... but I didn't expect a large

      I don't know of any recent news except Synopsys
      quarterly results (results were good, but nothing stellar -
      may have started sell-off) and Synopsys announcing a
      buy back of 5% of their shares so they can reissue
      them as employee stock options and such. That last one
      should have a net zero effect in my book.

      see if my prediction comes true that SNPS will dip
      under $35 (another buy opportunity) before some analyst
      notices and upgrades and sends trading volume and price
      back up. It sure is being cooperative so far.

    • Earnings were good. Good things were said. What's the beef? :)

      Joe S.

    • I have done a great deal of work in the area of
      Formal Verification so let me add my 2 cents.

      believe at this point in time all the tools are not too
      mature. They all have a long way to go. The best "today"
      is Chrysalis by far. I have evaluated it against
      Formality and the unannounced product from Mentor. Doing
      netlist compares all tools seem to work and preform
      similar. On RTL to gates there are big differences.
      Formality gives incorrect answers, it says design are
      equivalent when they are indeed different. The other tool is
      too new and had too many bugs to complete the

      Someday, the technology will become a requiremsnt for chip
      design but today it has a great deal of promise only.

    • I think your "right-on" with one exception.
      Formal. SNPS is going nowhere. They have OK capabilities
      on Gate-Gate design but this is not where the design
      methodology needs to go. You must compare RTL to gate and
      Formality can not do this because they use the same
      compiler as synthesis. Because of this major flaw the
      product in the longterm is useless.

      My feeling is
      SNPS should purchase a formal verification company for
      independence. They could keep them separate and feed them well.
      There are many areas in formal that need lot's of work
      but little companies can invest enough and thus we
      all suffer.

      As to ASIC, I just did a huge ASIC
      with IBM and their tool of choice was Chrysalis. They
      told me that Synopys will be supported but never used
      because it can not find all design flaws.

      My rec
      is they buy Chrysalis now before they either become
      overly expensive or languish in the startup mode

    • Synopsis was mentioned positively in yesterday's
      Investor's Business Daily (New America) article regarding
      Summit Design (SMMT). SMMT sells a popular front-end
      design system which (I believe) requires SNPS's software
      for converting into code. Additional business for
      SMMT should also lead to more business for SNPS. I'm a
      SMMT shareholder, also have been looking to buy into
      SNPS as well. Any opinions here on SMMT, especially as
      it relates to SNPS?

    • I partially agree with your analysis - some of
      the SNPS self-developed products have been real
      stinkers... I definitely belive that you are absolutely dead
      wrong on couple of your analyses though.


      Verilog sim - Failed effort bought VCS

      Emulation - Couln't make money at it => sold off

      Test Compiler - Lame except for DFT => bought
      Behave Compiler - Initial failure =>

      still looking for people who can really use.
      Advisor - Failed - some marketing guy was was
      their own bathwater

      Jury is out or don't
      Cyclone - Seems like some customer are using, but
      cycle based sim market ever grow big, espec
      for VHDL ?
      FPGA - is FPGA Express making money ?
      Seems like every Joe
      and their brother is selling
      it - Xilinx, Data I/O,
      VeriBest, ViewLogic

      Cossap - What is success ? At DAC, it seemed like Cossap

      was in use for every cellular phone system
      design, but
      not sure if this means lots o

      Formality - Though reviews are mixed, I still
      think Foramlity
      is knocking the stuffing out of
      Chrysalis and maybe
      Abstract, based not just on my
      opinion, but on what I
      see from LSI Logic, IBM ASIC
      and NEC => Maybe it's just
      better for big
      designs ?? Given that Formality has
      entered against
      entrenched dedicated company with 4
      yr. technology lead
      and dominant market position, I'ld
      say that's
      pretty good (though they still may surprise
      me and
      buy Chrysalis)

      Timing - As a designer,
      using PrimeTime over Motive is a
      dream come true.
      Motive was always very clunky but
      gave very
      accurate answers. PrimeTime gets the same
      (almost), but is lots easier to use. It would
      have been
      a winner with or without Motive purchase.
      glad that SNPS offered upgrade path since our team

      would have forced our management to buy Primetime
      time in the next year anyhow.

      In my books
      a split decision..

      ps - I think some real
      dog products were also acquired
      VSS -bought from
      Cossap - was acquired I think, thus destroying your
      Emulation / Arkos was bought as well

      Basically a
      mixed bag - some lame, some great.

    • Nobody has a true formal verification product
      yet. If you look at the scholastic world and their
      work on formal methods, the potential is
      mind-boggling. Watch out traditional verification tools! The
      products Synopsys, Chrysalis, et al sell right now are the
      simplest of tools that they can call formal verification
      tools... All Formality does is functional comparison of 2
      netlists. Whoopie... And it doesn't even do that

      Now if Synopsys comes out with or buys some *real*
      Formal tools, I would be long-term bullish. If I'm
      right, the formal verification tools will expand in
      capability, grow a market and the simulation guys will start

      I saw the post about Synopsys' home-grown
      failures and bought successes and I agree - same as with
      CDN. If I look at the hot tools SNPS has, most were

      And the post regarding Abstract; they are a startup
      backed by 2 venture funding groups, one of which is
      Intel. They look promising but probably won't be public
      for a while.

      If anyone hears of a publicly
      traded Formal Verification focussed company, please let
      me know - I have some money ready.

      As for
      SNPS, I hope they break 50 and prove me wrong, but I've
      already sold off most of my position (back at $45+). The
      stock I have left is all covered by profits. Although
      the analysts still seem bullish, I am waiting until
      SNPS gets under $35 again to start reaccumulating.
      Hope I get away with it one more time. I figure
      eventually they will break $50, but not this time...
      trending is downward, MACD and Stochastic charts looking
      like it will continue down...

      But as I've said
      before, all it takes is some analyst to change a
      recommendation to send SNPS up again or downward even faster...

    • View More Messages
48.04+0.24(+0.50%)Oct 9 4:00 PMEDT