Extended Time-to-market (ttm) (4.3.2) - Designing Single Purpose Processors and Optimization
Students

Academic Programs

AI-powered learning for grades 8-12, aligned with major curricula

Professional

Professional Courses

Industry-relevant training in Business, Technology, and Design

Games

Interactive Games

Fun games to boost memory, math, typing, and English skills

Extended Time-to-Market (TTM)

Extended Time-to-Market (TTM)

Practice

Interactive Audio Lesson

Listen to a student-teacher conversation explaining the topic in a relatable way.

Understanding Extended TTM

πŸ”’ Unlock Audio Lesson

Sign up and enroll to listen to this audio lesson

0:00
--:--
Teacher
Teacher Instructor

Today we're discussing Extended Time-to-Market for Single-Purpose Processors. Does anyone know why SPPs might take longer to market than General Purpose Processors?

Student 1
Student 1

Is it because SPPs require more complex design processes?

Teacher
Teacher Instructor

Exactly! SPPs undergo several phases, from specification to testing, which takes a lot of time. Can anyone name one of those phases?

Student 2
Student 2

How about simulation?

Teacher
Teacher Instructor

Yes, simulation is a critical phase! Each of these must be executed thoroughly to reduce errors later. Remember: SPPs need complete verification, which adds to their TTM.

Student 3
Student 3

What happens if there’s a design flaw after fabrication?

Teacher
Teacher Instructor

Great question! If we find a flaw too late, we'll have to iterate our design, which can add several months to our timeline. It's like a rework cycle that we must avoid if possible.

Student 4
Student 4

So, it’s not just about creating the SPP but ensuring it meets all specifications before it goes to production?

Teacher
Teacher Instructor

Absolutely! That’s why planning and thorough testing are crucial. Let's summarize: Extended TTM is due to complex design, potential iteration delays, and the need for comprehensive verification.

Implications of Extended TTM

πŸ”’ Unlock Audio Lesson

Sign up and enroll to listen to this audio lesson

0:00
--:--
Teacher
Teacher Instructor

Now that we understand why TTM is longer for SPPs, let’s discuss its implications. How does a longer TTM affect market competitiveness?

Student 2
Student 2

It might mean that companies lose opportunities if their products take too long to release!

Teacher
Teacher Instructor

Correct! In rapidly evolving markets, any delay can result in lost opportunities and, ultimately, competitive disadvantage. Can you think of any examples?

Student 1
Student 1

Like when a new video codec comes out, and if SPPs aren’t ready, they could become obsolete?

Teacher
Teacher Instructor

Exactly! If the functionality doesn’t align with market needs, it may require a redesign. Obsolescence risk is very real with SPP due to this fixed nature.

Student 4
Student 4

So keeping the design adaptable is important?

Teacher
Teacher Instructor

While we want adaptability, SPPs inherently lack that flexibilityβ€”a trade-off we must manage strategically. Summarizing: Longer TTM can lead to missed market windows and potential obsolescence.

Balancing Design and TTM

πŸ”’ Unlock Audio Lesson

Sign up and enroll to listen to this audio lesson

0:00
--:--
Teacher
Teacher Instructor

Let’s talk about how we can balance thorough design with the pressures of Time-to-Market. What strategies might help?

Student 3
Student 3

Maybe using rapid prototyping tools to test designs before full production?

Teacher
Teacher Instructor

Excellent idea! Rapid prototyping can help identify issues earlier. What else?

Student 1
Student 1

Using reusable IP might speed up the design process too.

Teacher
Teacher Instructor

Yes, leveraging existing solutions can help reduce Non-Recurring Engineering costs and TTM. Keeping cores of designs ready can save significant time. Any other strategies?

Student 4
Student 4

Maybe simplifying the design itself?

Teacher
Teacher Instructor

Exactlyβ€”a simpler design can lead to faster verification times and fewer potential points of failure. So, our key points are: leveraging tools and existing designs, and simplifying the process to balance design integrity with TTM pressure.

Introduction & Overview

Read summaries of the section's main ideas at different levels of detail.

Quick Overview

Extended Time-to-Market (TTM) details the challenges and implications associated with the longer development cycles of Single-Purpose Processors (SPPs) compared to General Purpose Processors (GPPs).

Standard

This section discusses the implications of the longer Time-to-Market (TTM) when designing Single-Purpose Processors (SPPs). Key challenges include lengthy design cycles due to complex hardware requirements, iteration delays caused by design flaws, and the unsuitability for rapidly evolving technology markets. These factors significantly affect the overall feasibility and commercialization of SPPs.

Detailed

Extended Time-to-Market (TTM)

Extended Time-to-Market (TTM) refers to the prolonged duration it takes to bring a Single-Purpose Processor (SPP) into production, which can severely impact a product's viability and competitiveness. This section outlines the reasons behind this extended timeline:

Key Challenges and Considerations:

  1. Long Design Cycles: Unlike General Purpose Processors (GPPs), where software can be developed and deployed rapidly, the design process for SPPs involves multiple steps: specification, HDL coding, simulation, synthesis, place and route, fabrication, and testing. Each of these stages is intricate and time-consuming, often demanding months or even years to complete.
  2. Iteration Delays: If designers identify flaws in the SPP late in the development cycle, fixing these issues can require multiple iterations of the design process, especially at the fabrication stage. This re-working can add several months to the development timeline, making it difficult to remain competitive in fast-moving markets.
  3. Market Suitability: The inherent inflexibility of SPPs, combined with the protracted design timelines, makes them unsuitable for rapidly evolving markets where product requirements can change swiftly. If a new standard arises or if the code requirements shift, updating SPPs often necessitates a complete hardware redesign.

By understanding these challenges, students and practitioners can better appreciate the strategic decision-making involved in designing SPPs and the critical need for careful planning and resource allocation throughout the design lifecycle.

Audio Book

Dive deep into the subject with an immersive audiobook experience.

Long Design Cycles

Chapter 1 of 3

πŸ”’ Unlock Audio Chapter

Sign up and enroll to access the full audio experience

0:00
--:--

Chapter Content

The entire processβ€”from specification, design (HDL coding), simulation, synthesis, place and route, to fabrication and testingβ€”is significantly longer than simply writing and debugging software for a GPP.

Detailed Explanation

The design cycle for Single-Purpose Processors (SPPs) is lengthy due to its exhaustive steps. Unlike General Purpose Processors (GPPs) where software is simply written and tested, SPPs require a structured approach. The stages involve first creating specifications to clearly define what the processor should do. Then, developers must write code in hardware description language (HDL), followed by simulations to predict how the design will work. After this, the hardware design is synthesized into circuit layouts, routed, fabricated into physical chips, and finally tested for functionality. Each stage is crucial and time-consuming, resulting in a total design duration that can be much longer than the software development cycle for GPPs.

Examples & Analogies

Imagine designing a custom home versus renting an apartment. When you rent, you can simply move in after signing the lease, similar to how GPP software just needs coding and debugging. However, when you build a home, you go through a lengthy process of planning, designing, getting permits, construction, and inspectingβ€”all of which take time. Just like building a home, designing an SPP takes significantly more time compared to GPPs.

Iteration Delays

Chapter 2 of 3

πŸ”’ Unlock Audio Chapter

Sign up and enroll to access the full audio experience

0:00
--:--

Chapter Content

If design flaws are found late, fixing them can involve multiple iterations of the entire flow, especially fabrication, adding months or even a year to the project timeline.

Detailed Explanation

In hardware design for SPPs, if problems are detected later in the design process, fixing these issues isn't as simple as changing a line of code. Instead, it could involve going back to the drawing board and revisiting the detailed design phasesβ€”like simulation and synthesisβ€”before approaching re-fabrication. This compounding issue leads to delays, often extending the timeline by several months or even longer, as the entire process needs to be repeated. This further emphasizes how crucial it is to identify and correct design issues as early as possible in the development cycle.

Examples & Analogies

Consider a team building a complex Lego structure for a competition. If they realize towards the end that a crucial section doesn’t fit, they cannot just change a few pieces; they may need to dismantle parts and rebuild them carefully. This is comparable to an engineer having to fix design flaws in an SPP, which may mean revisiting long stages of their work, resulting in significant delays.

Implication for Market Suitability

Chapter 3 of 3

πŸ”’ Unlock Audio Chapter

Sign up and enroll to access the full audio experience

0:00
--:--

Chapter Content

Not suitable for rapidly evolving markets or products with short shelf lives.

Detailed Explanation

Due to the long design cycles and potential for significant iteration delays, SPPs are not well-suited for industries where technologies or market requirements evolve rapidly. If a company needs to develop and release a new product quickly or adjust existing products based on fast-changing consumer preferences, the time required to design, test, and fabricate an SPP can render it obsolete by the time it hits the market. Therefore, companies often prefer GPPs in such fast-paced environments, where software updates can adapt to new demands quickly.

Examples & Analogies

Think of the smartphone industry, where trends can change overnight. If a tech company were to rely on a custom chip design to meet new consumer preferences, they might end up with a chip that’s outdated by the time it’s ready for sale. Instead, they opt for flexible software solutions that can be updated even after the hardware is launched, much faster than a long SPP design process would allow.

Key Concepts

  • Extended TTM: A significant delay that can impact a product's market introduction.

  • SPP vs. GPP: SPPs have longer processes due to design complexity, while GPPs can offer quicker software-based solutions.

  • Iterative Design Challenges: Seeking to rectify design flaws late in the process can exacerbate TTM.

  • Market Obsolescence: SPPs risk becoming outdated before they hit the market due to their inflexibility.

Examples & Applications

A smartphone that requires the latest image processing codec could require SPPs, which may be delayed if the design takes too long to finalize.

Video game consoles that need custom hardware must balance performance against the potential for outdated technology before release.

Memory Aids

Interactive tools to help you remember key concepts

🎡

Rhymes

In time to market, delays can bring, Avoid mistakes, and effort sting.

πŸ“–

Stories

Imagine a tailor creating a custom suit for a specific occasion. If they take too long, by the time it's finished, fashion may have changed, making the effort irrelevant.

🧠

Memory Tools

SPP: Slow Product Production (to remember SPP's longer design time).

🎯

Acronyms

TTM

Timed To Manufacture (for remembering that timing is critical in the production process).

Flash Cards

Glossary

TimetoMarket (TTM)

The length of time between the initial concept of a product and its availability for sale.

SinglePurpose Processors (SPPs)

Custom-designed processors optimized for a specific task or algorithm, often resulting in better performance and efficiency.

General Purpose Processors (GPPs)

Processors designed to perform a wide range of tasks through software, offering flexibility but potentially less efficiency for specific tasks.

NonRecurring Engineering (NRE) Cost

The initial cost associated with the design and development of a product which does not recur in subsequent production runs.

Prototype

A preliminary model of a product used to test and validate design concepts before full-scale production.

Reference links

Supplementary resources to enhance your learning experience.