{"id":3776,"date":"2026-04-01T15:58:50","date_gmt":"2026-04-01T19:58:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.sw.siemens.com\/calibre\/?p=3776"},"modified":"2026-04-01T15:58:54","modified_gmt":"2026-04-01T19:58:54","slug":"reliability-verification-for-the-era-of-3d-ics","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.sw.siemens.com\/calibre\/2026\/04\/01\/reliability-verification-for-the-era-of-3d-ics\/","title":{"rendered":"Meeting the challenges of reliability verification for the era of 3D ICs"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

By Keerthana Chelur Hithesh<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No one likes surprises during chip tape-out\u2014especially when they threaten your project\u2019s reliability. Electrostatic discharge (ESD) failures are a persistent and costly issue in integrated circuit (IC) manufacturing. Researchers at Imec estimate that ESD-related problems account for\u00a0almost 40 percent of all IC failures<\/strong><\/a>. As the\u00a0global 3D IC market surges toward\u00a032 billion by 2030<\/strong><\/a>, design teams face a critical challenge: conventional reliability verification methods are no longer sufficient for advanced multi-die architectures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This blog unpacks the hidden reliability crisis emerging in advanced 2.5D and 3D ICs, explains why conventional verification fails and explores how Siemens EDA tools, Innovator 3D IC<\/a> <\/strong>and Calibre 3DPERC<\/a><\/strong>, address these challenges. Let\u2019s dive into how you can transform complexity into a competitive advantage with smarter, system-level verification.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why 2.5D and 3D ICs are reshaping reliability standards<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

2.5D and 3D integrated<\/a><\/strong> circuits promise unmatched performance, reduced power consumption and more features in smaller form factors. Yet, the complexity of these designs is triggering a hidden verification crisis. The industry\u2019s evolution from traditional 2D ICs to dense 2.5D and stacked 3D architectures is not simply a step forward\u2014it\u2019s a paradigm shift that exposes flaws in legacy verification flows. Figure 1 shows simplified depictions of 2.5D and 3D chip architectures.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"Diagram
Figure 1. A visual comparison of 2.5D IC and 3D IC architectures, illustrating the side-by-side die placement on an interposer for 2.5D ICs versus the vertical stacking of dies with TSVs and micro-bumps for 3D ICs.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

The verification flows you\u2019ve relied on for years are being outpaced by the rapid shift to multi-die designs. Traditional methods built for single-die architectures can\u2019t keep up with the intricate interactions, diverse technology nodes and vendor ecosystems involved in modern 3D ICs. If you\u2019re responsible for ensuring reliability in the age of advanced semiconductors, you need practical insight into why your current tools may fall short\u2014and discover what a purpose-built approach looks like.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The multi-layered reliability problem in 3D integration<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Electrostatic discharge protection complexity<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    <\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    ESD protection<\/strong><\/a> is relatively straightforward in conventional 2D designs, with clear paths and predictable behavior. In contrast, 3D IC architectures create a maze of potential discharge routes, making traditional tools obsolete for accurate modeling and verification.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    In 3D ICs, distinguishing between internal and external I\/O connections is crucial. Internal stacked-die connections require distinct protection strategies. However, many verification tools treat all paths the same, which can lead to wasted area and power through over-protection or reliability risks through under-protection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Inter-die connectivity verification challenges<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Physical connections like through-silicon vias (TSVs), microbumps and advanced packaging techniques add new layers of complexity. Each connection can be a potential failure point, requiring analysis for resistance, current density and thermal factors. Connections often cross voltage domains, clock regions and signal types, multiplying verification requirements. Legacy point-to-point approaches become unusable amid the intricate web characteristic of modern 3D assemblies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Siemens EDA reliability verification: Innovator 3D and Calibre 3DPERC<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Recognizing these fundamental challenges, Siemens EDA has developed a flow that addresses the unique requirements of 3D IC reliability verification. The Innovator 3D IC<\/a><\/strong> flow, seamlessly integrated with Calibre 3DPERC<\/a><\/strong>, represents a purpose-built approach to system-level reliability verification for advanced multi-die assemblies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Dual verification strategy for maximum flexibility<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

    The Innovator 3D methodology employs both black-box and white-box verification strategies, allowing design teams to choose the appropriate level of detail based on their specific project requirements and timeline constraints. This flexibility proves essential in modern design environments where different project phases demand different verification approaches. <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n