Soc Design career question

[[email protected]]

hi all
Im a frsh grad BE electronics and am working with a top semi compnay. i
have been offered the synthesis and timing
team out here.

Now my long term interests are in embedded systems /
comp arch / comp engineering ..stuff like
microprocessors etc. i may
even apply for my MS in these fields in an year or 2. with
that in mind , i have a few questions ...

1)Will my current field ( Synthesis and timing ) help
me

- enhance my knowledge in these fields

- get a good admit into an MS course of my choice , or
will somethign like verification be better ( i have
been given a choice between the S&T and
verification

2) Is it easy , or for that matter possiuble to get
into a course that is not exactly what u have been
doing for the past 2 years (say into comp arch course
from doing layout or even timing for that matter?)..i
am concerned coz i would need a schol

BTW how close to arch/micrP is Synthesis,compared to
verification?

3) will experience in Syn and Timing give me some sort
of an edge further in my career moving into embedded
systems/ arch , which is closer to verification since
you would need to know the arch of your chip all the
time.. or do i run a risk of being jack of all master
of none since i would be away from arch for 2
years?(would i?)

4) now im seeking out more from industry experienced people
....the situation is that i am in a relatively new group .the group head
wil be directly mentoring
me in synthesiss , whereas the verification team will
habve 15 more people , all of whom will be more
experience that me.. so career wise , where would it
be wiser to stay

5) again , is it easioer moving into verification
(since there r more people in ver) than moving into
Syn & timign?

SOrry for the deluge of questions ...if they seem
confusing...they just reflect my state of mind..

please reply soon , i need to mke my decision
by tuesday ..Thanks a lot

VLSIFRESHER

 

[night soil dalits]

hi all
Im a frsh grad BE electronics and am working with a top semi compnay. i
have been offered the synthesis and timing
team out here.

Now my long term interests are in embedded systems /
comp arch / comp engineering ..stuff like
microprocessors etc. i may
even apply for my MS in these fields in an year or 2. with
that in mind , i have a few questions ...

1)Will my current field ( Synthesis and timing ) help
me

- enhance my knowledge in these fields
Yes

- get a good admit into an MS course of my choice , or
will somethign like verification be better ( i have
been given a choice between the S&T and
verification
Yes

2) Is it easy , or for that matter possiuble to get
into a course that is not exactly what u have been
doing for the past 2 years (say into comp arch course
from doing layout or even timing for that matter?)..i
am concerned coz i would need a schol

no problem,

BTW how close to arch/micrP is Synthesis,compared to
verification?

Synth is harder. but you got to start somewhere

3) will experience in Syn and Timing give me some sort
of an edge further in my career moving into embedded
systems/ arch , which is closer to verification since
you would need to know the arch of your chip all the
time.. or do i run a risk of being jack of all master
of none since i would be away from arch for 2
years?(would i?)

It will help, keep a hand it the other field

4) now im seeking out more from industry experienced people
...the situation is that i am in a relatively new group .the group head
wil be directly mentoring
me in synthesiss , whereas the verification team will
habve 15 more people , all of whom will be more
experience that me.. so career wise , where would it
be wiser to stay

With the smarter people in the areas you want to learn in.

5) again , is it easioer moving into verification
(since there r more people in ver) than moving into
Syn & timign?
yes.


SOrry for the deluge of questions ...if they seem
confusing...they just reflect my state of mind..

please reply soon , i need to mke my decision
by tuesday ..Thanks a lot

VLSIFRESHER

Going for you MS should have little to do with what group you are/will be
in, so you can take that out as a factor.

 

[Winfield Hill]

[email protected] wrote...

1) Will my current field ( Synthesis and timing ) help me...

You should not narrow your interests so much as to make a
statement like "my current field (synthesis and timing)..."
but rather in your work broaden and stretch your attention
and interests.

My usual recommendation is pick a few things you really like
and become a true expert in those, while seeking to broadly
understand related areas, into which they can be integrated.

 

[keith]

hi all
Im a frsh grad BE electronics and am working with a top semi compnay. i
have been offered the synthesis and timing
team out here.

What's a BE?

Now my long term interests are in embedded systems /
comp arch / comp engineering ..stuff like
microprocessors etc. i may
even apply for my MS in these fields in an year or 2. with
that in mind , i have a few questions ...

1)Will my current field ( Synthesis and timing ) help
me

Sure. BTW, I rather like doing that sort of work.

- enhance my knowledge in these fields

- get a good admit into an MS course of my choice , or
will somethign like verification be better ( i have
been given a choice between the S&T and
verification

No clue. IMO, an MS is useless unless it's on the way to a PhD. The time
spent on the MS is usually better spent in the business (unless you can do
both at the same time).

2) Is it easy , or for that matter possiuble to get
into a course that is not exactly what u have been
doing for the past 2 years (say into comp arch course
from doing layout or even timing for that matter?)..i
am concerned coz i would need a schol

BTW how close to arch/micrP is Synthesis,compared to
verification?

It's not all that far, kinda like Buffalo and Toronto. Verification isn't
what I want to do, but it *is* in demand. Verification is too much
programming for my tastes, perhaps because I can't spell C++. Timing is a
nice break though. It's interesting trying to put ten pounds of BS in a
five pound bag.

3) will experience in Syn and Timing give me some sort
of an edge further in my career moving into embedded
systems/ arch , which is closer to verification since
you would need to know the arch of your chip all the
time.. or do i run a risk of being jack of all master
of none since i would be away from arch for 2
years?(would i?)

IMO, verification is further from design than the others. Sure, you have
to understand the architecture, but verification itself doesn't give you
much of an idea *how* the devices are used. It is a skill in high demand
though.

4) now im seeking out more from industry experienced people ...the
situation is that i am in a relatively new group .the group head wil be
directly mentoring
me in synthesiss , whereas the verification team will habve 15 more
people , all of whom will be more experience that me.. so career wise ,
where would it be wiser to stay

That is a tough question. I've always tried to go for what the others
aren't doing. Big-fish/small-pond sort of thing.

5) again , is it easioer moving into verification (since there r more
people in ver) than moving into Syn & timign?

Once again, verification is hin huge demand. Once you get there it might
be hard to leave. This may be a good thing, or maybe not. ;-)

SOrry for the deluge of questions ...if they seem
confusing...they just
reflect my state of mind..

What do *you* want to do? What's important to you. That's the key.

please reply soon , i need to mke my decision by tuesday ..Thanks a lot

Go with the force, Luke!

 

[Wei \William\ Wang]

IMHO, if you are considering doing MS after one year or two, maybe you can
consider about doing a PhD as well, as far as I know, most senior people in
SoC design industry have PhD degrees.

 

[Jim Thompson]

IMHO, if you are considering doing MS after one year or two, maybe you can
consider about doing a PhD as well, as far as I know, most senior people in
SoC design industry have PhD degrees.

[snip]

So everyone can snicker behind your back and whisper, "Dumb shit"?

PhD's should be kept in cages... they **** up more designs than you
can even fathom. Theory is to practice as Democrats are to
Republicans ;-)

...Jim Thompson

 

[Jim Thompson]

IMHO, if you are considering doing MS after one year or two, maybe you can
consider about doing a PhD as well, as far as I know, most senior people in
SoC design industry have PhD degrees.

[snip]

So everyone can snicker behind your back and whisper, "Dumb shit"?

PhD's should be kept in cages... they **** up more designs than you
can even fathom. Theory is to practice as Democrats are to
Republicans ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Forgot to add... the project I am currently working has gone through
three PhD's since the first of the year... chew 'em up, spit 'em out
;-)

...Jim Thompson

 

[Wei \William\ Wang]

ha-ha, PhDs are a bit theoretical...but it is also true for a technology
company to have senior people with PhD degrees, just MHO...

IMHO, if you are considering doing MS after one year or two, maybe you
can
consider about doing a PhD as well, as far as I know, most senior people
in
SoC design industry have PhD degrees.

[snip]

So everyone can snicker behind your back and whisper, "Dumb shit"?

PhD's should be kept in cages... they **** up more designs than you
can even fathom. Theory is to practice as Democrats are to
Republicans ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Forgot to add... the project I am currently working has gone through
three PhD's since the first of the year... chew 'em up, spit 'em out
;-)

...Jim Thompson

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 19:42:30 +0100, "Wei \"William\" Wang"

[snip]

I think venture capitalists tend to be suckers for PhD's but, as I
say, three down and more to go ;-)

...Jim Thompson

 

[keith]

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 19:42:30 +0100, "Wei \"William\" Wang"

[snip]

I think venture capitalists tend to be suckers for PhD's but, as I
say, three down and more to go ;-)

There is a place for PhD's, but it's not in design, particularly SoCs.
SOCs are a simple matter of finding someone with enough money to pay the
OTC. ...perhaps a MBA would be a better fit in the team. ;-)

 

[Guest]

What's a BE?

Batchelor of Engineering.
Generally a 4 or 5 year program.

 

[Guest]

ha-ha, PhDs are a bit theoretical...but it is also true for a technology
company to have senior people with PhD degrees, just MHO...

Still, a PhD might help the chances of promotion.

On the other hand, if Straydog is to be believed, a PhD can be a millstone
and the years might be better used on a MS and then a MBA.


--

Seek simplicity and mistrust it.
Alfred Whitehead

A witty saying proves nothing.
Voltaire

 

[Straydog]

Still, a PhD might help the chances of promotion.

On the other hand, if Straydog is to be believed,

1. You don't have to believe me, just look up the references to the
studies (on my website: http://scijobs.freeshell.org) and talk to people
who have "been there" and are willing to tell the truth. And, by the way,
there are quite a few papers published in journals to show there is a
larger attrition out of all these jobs than you would think should be.

2. If you want to have a PhD and be in a job that uses it, then research
out those nice permanent government jobs where its almost impossible to
get fired and being part of a govt program its pretty safe from reductions
in force (RIFs). Or, become rich with a lottery win, then take the money
and set up your own private lab, privately funded by you (so you're
isolated from RIFs, changes in market forces, whims of upper management,
etc).

3. I also tell people to look at the job market and i) figure out what the
applicant to job ratio is, 2) figure out how long people are taking to
find a job, 3) how long they stay in the job, 4) how well are the jobs
paying & job security....and do that instead of reading graduate school
catalogs and dreaming on cloud 9 about lofty pies-in-the-sky.

Remember, people who get MDs end up doing a lot better for a lot longer
than most PhDs.

a PhD can be a millstone

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 19:42:30 +0100, "Wei \"William\" Wang"

[snip]

I think venture capitalists tend to be suckers for PhD's

I've seen the opposite: PhDs start companies, raise 3F money, spend
themselves to the brink of disaster, and then the VCs come in and wind
up owning their bodies and souls.

PhDs are OK, but they usually need help thinking.

John

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:39:40 -0700, Jim Thompson
[snip]

I think venture capitalists tend to be suckers for PhD's

[snip]

PhDs are OK, but they usually need help thinking.

John

That's for sure. Too much theory and not enough practice.

...Jim Thompson

 

[Leonard]

**DON'T** do it. Open a nice garden shop, or better yet, a pig farm.
If all goes badly, you've got pork.