As someone who has enjoyed the occasional life opportunity to drive a performance car, I've learned that raw horsepower doesn't tell the whole story. An electric vehicle (EV) might deliver instant torque and impressive acceleration, while a V12 offers incredible power and character, but neither reaches its full potential if the rest of the system becomes the bottleneck. Battery capacity, thermal management, transmission efficiency, and power delivery all influence real-world performance. The bottleneck shifts from the engine, or raw horsepower, to the systems supporting it.
AI and data-centric systems have many different engines like CPUs, GPUs and NPU’s interconnected to memories and subsystems driving unprecedented growth in software workloads, memory capacity, and interface complexity. As a result, verification teams are challenged to validate complete hardware/software systems long before silicon is available, and memory subsystems are increasingly at the center of this challenge.
Complex memory designs may incorporate HBM in the order of tens of gigabytes, LPDDR exceeding 128 GB, and NAND storage in the terabyte range. While emulation platforms provide the compute capacity needed to model these systems, memory capacity and bandwidth often become the limiting factors. As memory requirements grow, efficiently modeling and accessing that memory becomes essential to maintaining verification throughput.
Having a faster engine without a suitable transmission to the wheels doesn’t you win the race!
The memory wall issue is where the compute layer is running so fast that the memory layer cannot keep up, causing the overall system to stall.”
Herman Cheung
|Micron Technology*
Micron created a model based on a NAND flash design with a bus functional model (BFM) based on Micron’s proprietary technology and architecture for supporting the memory protocol and memory interface. An essential part of the architecture was the Synopsys ZeBu memory transactor that connected the hardware model to host memory, helping the team analyze, validate and optimize memory behavior earlier in development.
Between the BFM and the memory transactor, a data flow state machine made sure no data got blocked (see Figure 1).
Figure 1. NAND Use Model
Micron used this model to explore techniques for memory model optimization during emulation using Synopsys ZeBu Server. By reducing unnecessary data movement, tuning cache behavior, and optimizing how memory resources were implemented, the team improved overall emulation throughput.
The Micron team improved performance by minimizing emulator-to-host communication, a major source of runtime overhead. Key optimizations included keeping high-traffic resources in hardware, batching transfers into larger transactions, using backdoor access to accelerate data loading, and tuning cache policies for different workload types. By reducing unnecessary data movement and improving memory access efficiency, they significantly increased overall emulation throughput.
The idea here was to improve performance by optimizing timing behavior and increasing parallelism. Key techniques included replacing emulator-unfriendly # delays with clock counters, using enable signals instead of unnecessary clock gating, leveraging cycle-accurate interfaces for non-critical paths, pipelining memory operations, and scheduling transfers during idle cycles. Together, these optimizations reduced stalls, increased concurrency, and kept the emulator running more efficiently.
The team used profiling and performance metrics to identify bottlenecks, analyze critical memory timing paths, and optimize queue depths and cache settings for different workloads. By continuously measuring emulation frequency and active run time, they were able to focus on changes that delivered the greatest performance and avoid spending time on optimizations with limited impact.
Profiling helped the team focus on optimizations that delivered measurable gains. However, not every approach produced a meaningful benefit. Micron evaluated sparse memory scaling, but it did not significantly improve runtime, suggesting that hardware memory footprint was not the dominant performance bottleneck. Instead, data movement, timing behavior, cache tuning, and critical path optimization had a much larger impact.
Applying sparse memory optimization didn't really gain too much in terms of runtime performance... hardware resources were not really the limiting factor.”
Herman Cheung
|Micron Technology*
Although results varied by workload, Micron demonstrated that focused memory model optimization can deliver more than 3x improvement in emulation performance (see Table 1).
| Benchmarks | Before Optimization | After Optimization | Performance Gain % |
| Clock Active % | 65% Average | 91% Average | +40% |
| Emulation CLock Frequency | 210/105/52.5 kHz | 830/415/207.5 kHz | +395% |
| Emulation Run Time | 1630 seconds | 440 seconds | -370% |
Table 1: More than 3x Improvement in Emulation Performance
Summarize the main points of your blog article and provide any closing thoughts or insights. This is your chance to reinforce your message and leave a lasting impression on your readers.This project also illustrates a broader industry trend: as AI and software-defined systems continue to increase verification complexity, emulation is becoming essential for validating complete hardware/software systems on a meaningful scale. By combining optimized memory models and interface solutions in general, which are nothing but software-defined solutions for Synopsys ZeBu emulation, teams can accelerate software bring-up, improve system validation efficiency, and reduce risk on the path to first silicon.
Much like a V12 sports car or a high-performance EV, the fastest system is not always the one with the most power. It is the one that delivers power most efficiently across the entire system.
References - Converge SJ 2026 (SNUG)