How can design teams employ new tools and develop response methodologies yet still stay within design budgets? How much effort does it require to be an early adopter and what kind of measurable results compensate for this effort? Panelists discuss how their design-for-manufacture (DFM) tools fit into a fixed design methodology, budget and timeline, and give examples of expected ROI (monetary, quality, reduced time-to-market, and comprehensive yield).The aim of this panel is to provide a serious comparison of related DFM technologies on the market and some idea of the cost and difficulty of integrating the tools into a fixed design budget and timeline. Specific results will be cited, along with examples of expected ROI (monetary, quality, reduced time-to-market, and comprehensive yield enhancement).The audience should walk away with enough information to make an informed decision on which companies would make sense for their DFM challenges, to reach their own yield and throughput goals.

Several years ago, the vertically integrated semiconductor companies started to disaggregate into separate sectors, such as fabless, EDA, IP, Design Services, DFT, foundry, and test & packaging houses. On the one hand the disaggregated sectors are in the process of merging and optimizing their product lines, roles and responsibilities On the other hand, certain companies are trying to reverse the trend by reaggregating some of the disaggregated sectors. Will the reaggregation trend dominate? Which trend enables a better semiconductor market growth? Which trend allows superior technological offerrings? Who will be the shark?

No abstract available.