Menu

TechValidate Research on PADS

These pages present data that TechValidate has sourced via direct research with verified customers and users of PADS. TechValidate stands behind the authenticity of all published data. Learn more »



2,253 Customers Surveyed

17,607 Data Points Collected

91 Published TechFacts

12 Published Charts

35 Published Case Studies



Selected Research Highlights


Case Study: Accuracy of PADS Library Data – Medium Enterprise Electronics Company

Introduction

This case study of a medium enterprise electronics company is based on a February 2015 survey of PADS starter libraries customers by TechValidate, a 3rd-party research service. The profiled company asked to have their name blinded to protect their confidentiality.

“PADS starter libraries provide fast and accurate information. Good attributes.”

Challenges

We had problems with our previous PCB libraries:

  • Inaccurate data / incorrect build
  • Missing data / missing attributes

Use Case

  • We chose the PADS starter libraries:
    • To reduce library development time
    • For its complete part information (schematic symbol, footprints, parametric data)
    • Because they were proven in a commercial environment

Results

  • We estimate the PADS starter libraries will save us 30 – 49% on library development time, with fewer errors, reduced overall design time, and higher-quality designs.
  • With the PADS starter libraries, we’ll have:
    • Increased productivity
    • Higher confidence and less risk

PADS Physical Design Reuse Saves Time

How many hours, per design, do you save with PADS physical design reuse?

More than a day
26%
5-8
16%
3-4
30%
1-2
28%

HyperLynx Reduces PCB Respins

PADS customers using HyperLynx in their design flow saved an average of three respins per design.

Why I Like PADS

  • Intuitive interface
  • Keyboard shortcuts
  • Ease of creating new parts and footprints
  • Efficient DFM tools

Why Customers Choose PADS

Why did you or your company choose PADS over other desktop PCB design tools?

Ease of Use
37%
Proven Performance
30%
Best Value
24%
Company Standard
22%
Partner Compatibility (e.g. Service Bureaus, Reference Designs)
20%
Simple Learning Curve
19%

Case Study: Large Industrial Manufacturing Company Chooses PADS over Altium and OrCAD

Introduction

This case study of a large enterprise industrial manufacturing company is based on a December 2013 survey of Mentor Graphics PADS customers by TechValidate, a 3rd-party research service. The profiled company asked to have their name blinded to protect their confidentiality.

Challenges

  • Plans to solve the following key design challenges:
    • Improve time to market
    • Address demand for higher-quality, feature-rich products
    • Reduce development budgets and meet cost targets
    • Reduce the number of design spins
  • Find a PCB tool that is:
    • Easy to use
    • Best value
    • Simple learning curve
    • Proven performance
    • Compatible with service bureaus and reference designs

Use Case

  • Purchased PADS ES Suite.
  • Conducts 76% – 100% of designs in-house.

Results

  • Chose PADS over the OrCAD and Altium Designer
  • Plans to use the following capabilities in the PADS ES Suite:
    • Schematic capture
    • Component selection
    • Signal integrity analysis


More to Explore



About PADS

PADS®, Mentor Graphics’ desktop PCB design tool, enables development of PCBs within a highly productive, scalable, and easy-to-use environment.

PADS Website   Mentor Graphics Website