Modelsim PE vs. Aldec Active-HDL (PE)
in [FPGA]
|
Prev: Antti....
Next: Laptop for FPGA design?
From: Pete Fraser on 3 Mar 2010 08:02 I've finally decided to buy a better simulator (I've been making do with Modelsim XE so far). Any thoughts as to the relative merits of Modelsim PE and Active-HDL (PE) for FPGA simulation? Thanks Pete
From: rickman on 3 Mar 2010 09:13 On Mar 3, 8:02 am, "Pete Fraser" <pfra...(a)covad.net> wrote: > I've finally decided to buy a better simulator > (I've been making do with Modelsim XE so far). > > Any thoughts as to the relative merits of Modelsim PE and > Active-HDL (PE) for FPGA simulation? I can't say anything about the question you asked, but I can say that I bought the entry level design package for Lattice since they don't have a free version that can actually be used for work like Xilinx and Altera do. I ordered the package that included ModelSim and that was good for me since that is the only simulator I have used. But between the time I sent in the order and the time when I licensed the tool, they changed their agreements and started providing ActiveHDL! I complained loudly but they would not provide a license for the tool I had and would only send me the software for the new tool. So I gave it a try and have hardly looked back. My point is that it is very easy to switch and I am totally happy with ActiveHDL. I can't think of anything about that I don't like other than possibly the way it wants to create its own structure for your files, but I finally figured out how to keep it from copying the source files to it's own directory. I still don't know what the difference between a design and a "workspace" is, but the Lattice version only allows one design to a workspace. I don't seem to be limited by that. Rick
From: Dave on 3 Mar 2010 09:54 We bought Active-HDL since they are offering Mixed Language (VHDL & Verilog) simulation at an excellent price point. Also, the Active-HDL gui is much nicer to use (especially the waveform viewer) than Modelsim. Most likely since it is not TCL/TK based like Modelsim (as far as I know). I would vote for Active-HDL even if it was the same price as Modelsim.
From: Rob Gaddi on 3 Mar 2010 12:38 On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 06:54:00 -0800 (PST) Dave <doomeddave(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > We bought Active-HDL since they are offering Mixed Language (VHDL & > Verilog) simulation at an excellent price point. > > Also, the Active-HDL gui is much nicer to use (especially the waveform > viewer) than Modelsim. Most likely since it is not TCL/TK based like > Modelsim (as far as I know). > > I would vote for Active-HDL even if it was the same price as Modelsim. > > My experience with both has been that I prefer Active-HDL. The GUI is _much_ more polished; I found the ModelSim GUI to be an active impediment to work. In terms of the simulator itself I had serious problems (in both cases dealing with the Xilinx libraries) with both Active-HDL, which I paid for, and with ModelSim, which I evaled. For what it's worth I found ModelSim's support to be more responsive. -- Rob Gaddi, Highland Technology Email address is currently out of order
From: cfelton on 3 Mar 2010 13:24
>Any thoughts as to the relative merits of Modelsim PE and >Active-HDL (PE) for FPGA simulation? > Have had good luck with both. Active-HDL supports command line equivalent of ModelSim. One issue, the "default" format for the Active-HDL waveforms is large and slow (??). I think it was an extra license (cost) for the fast format. I don't recall which version of Active-HDL we had but it might be worth checking before a purchase. Another small note, Mentor had FAE locally (CO) that was useful. Didn't have as good access to Aldec FAE. But maybe I never needed to ask, so it was needed, can't remember? We ran all simulations from scripts (command line) and both worked from that perspective. .chris --------------------------------------- Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.com |