Tina-TI, Mindi, LTSpice, or what?

[mcovington]

Recommend free circuit simulation software?  I'm coming back to circuit design after a few years away from it and notice that Tina-TI (which I was using) hasn't been updated in a long time and doesn't even support TI's newer opamps (unless I've overlooked something).   I'm wanting to simulate mainly simple opamp and discrete transistor analog circuits.  Having a good simulation of a 555 is a plus (Tina-TI does). 

(I explained to my wife that Tina and Mindi are not women, and if I ask a search engine whether Tina or Mindi is better, I get strange stuff )

[mcovington]

I see that alongside Tina-TI (last revised 2018), Texas Instruments also has PSPICE-for-TI, which I'm checking out now...

[Feynman]

I'm using TINA-TI and LTspice. Usually, if I need a quick answer to a simple problem, I use LTspice.

For more detailed simulations (phase margin, noise, ...) I use TINA-TI as most of my op amps are TI parts. I also favor the approach of placing "meters" (TINA-TI) over probing net names (LTspice) as net names might change when modifying a circuit yielding results you didn't expect.

Newer TI parts usually have a TINA-TI model available on their respective product page. You just need to download and import them into TINA-TI.

[mcovington]

What is the best way to import a downloaded model into Tina-TI?

[tszaboo]

I've been using Tina-TI for the past years. Its a few version behind the actual Tina, that I've been eyeing to buy for a while now. The issue is that I don't really have a good overview of which parts of the software would be useful, and which one isn't.

[Sensorcat]

I also favor the approach of placing "meters" (TINA-TI) over probing net names (LTspice) as net names might change when modifying a circuit yielding results you didn't expect.

The node names n001, n002, etc. can change when modifying a circuit. If you provide your own label, that name is permanent.

[mcovington]

Tina-TI does still seem to be the one that has a devoted following, despite TI themselves moving to Cadence PSPICE.

How would I import a Microchip op-amp into Tina-TI, for example?   Presumably it can import SPICE models...

[Someone]

Qucs

I find it no more complex to drive than LTspice, its just that so many people use LTspice the "answers" are easier to find.

[twospoons]

Simetrix free version. You can do a lot with the free version - the node limit is reasonably generous. IMO it has a nicer UI than LTSpice, and adding models is as simple as 'drag and drop' the file into the command window.

[RoGeorge]

LTspice is the de facto standard for free SPICE-compatible simulators, and it's the most advanced in both engine and interface.  Has a big community and very long history, which means thousands and thousands of component models from all the manufacturers (outside the ones from the default LTspice libraries and LTspice examples), and you can easily find answers/tutorials/examples, etc. about how to use LTspice, from the most basics to the most trickiest simulations.

TINA-TI only makes sense if you must use particular TI components that only have TINA-TI models that can not be ported to SPICE.  I've tried TINA-TI a couple of years ago, and found it cumbersome and slow.  And close to no online usable answers when you search for anything else more complicated than basic usage.

I will recommend LTspice without hesitation, for either beginners or advanced users.

[selcuk]

You can try ngspice. It accepts text based netlist files and there is a command interface. You can use component models from various manufacturers.
https://ngspice.sourceforge.io

And this topic has information about other simulators:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/beginners/help-choosing-a-simulator-ltspice-qspice-or-tina-ti/

[RoGeorge]

Same for LTspice, netlists were always text in SPICE based simulator, just like component models/libs, symbols and schematics, and so on.  All text, and there are libraries already to interface LTspice, for example with Python, to do crazy things like AI or genetic algorithms generated schematics. 

Random example:
https://acidbourbon.wordpress.com/2019/11/26/seamless-integration-of-ltspice-in-python-numpy-signal-processing/
https://acidbourbon.wordpress.com/2019/12/04/ltspice-numpy-part-2-fast-convolution-filter/

[mcovington]

How does LTSpice compare to Cadence PSPICE-for-TI, which TI is now distributing?

[mcovington]

OK, I downloaded and installed LTSPICE and, on my high-DPI screen, almost can't see the schematics!   They are in super-thin blue lines on a gray background.  Changing the color settings doesn't help.  Is there a setting for fatter lines?

[RoGeorge]

It depends of your OS and settings, have you searched for "LTspice high DPI"?
https://ez.analog.com/design-tools-and-calculators/ltspice/f/q-a/534001/ltspice-high-dpi-rendering

Mine looks something like this (Ubuntu + Wine with settings in winecfg changed to 192 dpi + LTspice custom colors):

[nctnico]

There is also Microcap. This used to be a commercial package but since the creator retired, it is available for free. As usual the UI has a bit of a learning curve but I like it better than LTSpice.

[twospoons]

I like it better than LTSpice.

LTSpice has set the UI bar rather low.

[Warhawk]

I would not expect TINA TI being developed further. pSpice for TI is the mainstream now and there is a good reason why TI decided to have the second simulation tool. Nevertheless, what you want is Qspice or LTspice. I prefer Qspice for some reason.