Evaluating simulation software

Faced with increased competition, one of our adversaries has chosen a strategy of skewing information regarding CST with comparative remarks and benchmarks.  We at CST don't believe that the distribution of incorrect reports is an appropriate way of promoting a software tool.

With this in mind we have put together a short "Dos and Don'ts of evaluating simulation software". Please feel free to send your comments and queries to us, we would be happy to add your suggestions to our list.

Do:

• Do obtain as much factual information as possible.
• Do explore any independent, published benchmark examples.
• Do ask your software vendor to solve your company's own benchmark.
• Do test the software, support, and marketing statements for yourself.

Don't:

• Don't trust sales people comparing "xxx product" with CST MICROWAVE STUDIO® using results that they have produced themselves.  Take a look at the following example and see how misleading these reports can be.
• Don't trust salespeople who would like to make you believe:
  • that CST MICROWAVE STUDIO® has no automatic adaptive mesh refinement
  • that the goal function can only contain S-Parameters
  • that a large uniform mesh is required
  • that there is no control over accuracy and convergence
  • that there is only one monitor definition possible per run
  • that CST MICROWAVE STUDIO® has no periodic boundaries
  • that CST MICROWAVE STUDIO® has no eigenmode solver
• Don't trust anyone who uses the word "unique" too often, it is seldom true.
• Don't trust sales force xxx's claim that their product has a 90% market share in the area of 3D High Frequency simulation, this simply isn't true.

Selling software has always been a very technical task, CST believes that it should remain this way.

Furter information:

Misleading report
Technical specifications
Published benchmarks