• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Computer specs for AutoCad

B

b4u

Golden Member
Hi,

I'm in the process of choosing 4 computers to equip an office that will work with AutoCad.

Currently they work with AutoCad 2002, but most probably will upgrade to the latest AutoCad 2006.

From AutoDesk's site, the minimum specs for a computer are:

* Intel® Pentium® III or later processor or compatible, 800 MHz or higher
* Microsoft® Windows® XP (Professional, Home Edition, or Tablet PC Edition with SP1 or SP2), Windows 2000 Professional with SP4
* 512 MB RAM
* 500 MB free disk space for installation
* 1024x768 VGA with true color
* Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 (SP1 or later)
* CD-ROM drive
* Mouse, trackball, or compatible pointing device


So before taking the move to splash the cash, I would like to know, from any experience you may have with that software, what specs do you recommend.

They will also make some image editing, but for PaintShop or PhotoShop I think I'll be okay with the same specs needed for AutoCad.

Thank you.
 
My wife is an AutoCad user, so here's what I've heard from her: you really cannot hold back on very much on CPU or RAM, and you _especially_ cannot screw them on the video card. A Quadro is not a _real_ requirement depending on how and how much they're really using AutoCad, but if they're going to be using it heavily, definitely get them one (maybe one of the 6800 series ones?).

It's really hard to give good advice without knowing your budget per computer.
 
A lot depends on whether you're doing 3D shading or just drafting (like blue prints). You don't need any great video card for drafting.

I assume you will be doing some 3D rendering if you'll also be using Photoshop.

Memory is important for both Photoshop and CAD. Minimum 1Gb for serious work, although for drafting 512Mb is adequate). 2Gb is probably a waste unless you're working on very large projects. You can always keep an eye on memory usage in the task manager and add more later if needed.

I certainly would recommend you buy a OEM systems. You don't need the grief of building your own and then finding out about some incompatibility issue later.

Dell makes some nice workstations which is what I recommend for my clients.
 
My dad owns an engineering firm, and his biggest use for the computers are autocad. I belive he's running 2005 or 2004. Any way, he has 5 computers in his office, all of which are Dells. I only know specs for 3 of them, which all have a 20 inch dell flat panel, 512 ram, not sure on the cpu but its intel, and an x300 se. Im sure that if you plan to do rendering a much better video card is a must. Since he only drafts, the x300 with 512 is fine. And he got quite a discount by using Dell smalll bussiness...
 
Depending on what type of work your doing. I wouldn't go less then 1GB of RAM and at least a 128MB GPU, otherwise your "redraw" times will be excessive for big drawings. Dual Core would be an added bonus.
 
I work for SolidWorks and we use Zeon processors, 2 Gigs of ram, and Quadro FX 1000's here for our standard workstations.
 
Apples to Oranges, AutoCad is mainly a 2D program although it can do some 3D as of the last few releases.

Solid Works as with Autodesk Inventor are resource hogs, you need more RAM and a strong GPU to go along with it, even more now they are saying 3GB for large assemblies. These are mainly 3D programs so that's to be expected. In my opinion anything over 1GB of RAM for 2D work is over kill, but with the prices of RAM today that statement is null so go for as much as you can afford. GPU's are still expensive especially when you start looking at 3D Labs or the high end Quadro line.
 
We are running P4 2.8 GHz, 1 GB RAM, and 256MB FX5200's in our CAD lab. It freaking blows ass when you try to do 3D shading because of the 5200's, but in all other applications they work ok.
 
Originally posted by: NatePo717
I work for SolidWorks and we use Zeon processors, 2 Gigs of ram, and Quadro FX 1000's here for our standard workstations.
Click to expand...


solidworks -> solid edge?

we use solid edge at uni (though i think we'll be moving on to Uni graphics) but my friend reckons that solid works is much better to use, more intuitive. he proceeded to demostrate this to me by modeling a butt plug 😕
 
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
Originally posted by: NatePo717
I work for SolidWorks and we use Zeon processors, 2 Gigs of ram, and Quadro FX 1000's here for our standard workstations.
Click to expand...


solidworks -> solid edge?

we use solid edge at uni (though i think we'll be moving on to Uni graphics) but my friend reckons that solid works is much better to use, more intuitive. he proceeded to demostrate this to me by modeling a butt plug 😕
Click to expand...


Solid Edge is a competitor of Solid Works, it's a UGS product the same people who produce Unigraphics NX. Solid Edge isn't too widely used, not to say it's not good but Solid Works, Inventor and Pro/E have more seats on the market.

 
Thanks for the responses.

Today, they are using some P3 700-800MHz with about 128Mb (didn't know that software work with these lol) ... they are running AutoCad 2002, and I believe they do only Drafting ... BluePrints.

They are on a very small budget, and that's a problem ... about 600? (700-800USD) for each computer, and they need 4 of them. For them, to keep working with AutoCad 2002 it's no big deal, so I believe about 95% of actual computers will do the job ... I was just trying to use all the budget in some wise way (miracle, perhaps ... lol) so I could deliver machines that would work with the lattest AutoCad version, which I believe they will upgrade once they try it. So it would be a near-future-proof system.

Is it so much important to have a big graphic card for the job? The machines will be equiped with DVD-Rom (not RW nor any DVD-CDRW combo), and that budget will NOT include monitors (which they already have, and want to keep).

Keep advices comming ... thanks
 
Autodesk will soon retire AutoCad 2002 as of March 15, 2006 After that dat you won't be able to upgrade to the latest release or receive support.

You won't need a real powerful GPU for 2D work, for the price you can't beat a 128MB Quadro series card.
 
I use AutoCAD on an everyday basis at work. I think sometimes on these 'enthusiast' forums people tend to go a bit overboard on hardware. If you are doing 2d work, then a 2.0ghz P4 level processor and a 6200 graphics card with 512mb of ram will work fine for you. If you want to do 3d, just get a better card and go to a gig of ram. AutoCAD is not that much of a system hog. Gaming requires a much more power system then does running AutoCAD.

If you have a super high budget and just want to get a super powerful system because 'you can', well AutoCAD does support multi-threading so you can get a dual core processor and the top of the line Quadro or other pro-level card, but really it's overkill for 99.9% of people out there.
 
I currently have the specs and prices for the following system:

CPU Intel Pentium4 3.0E 800 Prescott SKT478
2x DIMM 512Mb DDR PC3200 (DDR400)
MSI 865PE Neo2-V 800/DualDDR/AGP8X/LAN/SATA P4
Power supply ATX 300W
MidiTower ATX Pentium IV Frontal USB
Gainward PRO/660 TV-DVI GeForce FX5900 128Mb DDR
Samsung 80Gb UDMA 7200rpm
Samsung Keyboard PS/2 - SDL-2500
Genius Power Scroll PS/2

I just copied everything from the paper, exactly as they are written. The price for this system will be about 790? (final, including taxes).

Now that lacks a network card, which is cheap.

Also I'll probably will have to change the graphics card from 5900 to a 5500 (because of stock limits, I've been told).

So I'm a bit off from current hardware, and graphic chips ... will I be well served with that system? I believe I'll have some extra performance room, that will enable me to work with AutoCad 2006.

Opinions are very welcome ... 🙂
 
I do computer support for an engineering firm, and the drafters in my office mostly use P3 (1 ghz max) machines with 256-512 mb sdram, TNT2 video cards. I wish we would get the go ahead to do an office wide upgrade, but we only just recently got the okay to upgrade two machines (we're using 2002, going to be switching to 2005/06 soon)
 
Originally posted by: lucasorion
I do computer support for an engineering firm, and the drafters in my office mostly use P3 (1 ghz max) machines with 256-512 mb sdram, TNT2 video cards. I wish we would get the go ahead to do an office wide upgrade, but we only just recently got the okay to upgrade two machines (we're using 2002, going to be switching to 2005/06 soon)
Click to expand...

On this office, the drafters also use AutoCad 2002 and on computers with lower spec than yours ...

So you received an okay for upgrade? I assume your upgrade will be focusing on running AutoCad 2006, so what system specs are you choosing?

What about graphic card? 5900, 5500, or other chip? I don't want to go beyhond (sp?) 128Mb ... to save some costs. People won't be playing any games (at least officially), so don't think splashing 500$ for a card to be budget/requirement viable.
 
If anyone is interested in the differences between the Quadro cards and the regular GeForce cards, this thread inspired me to search Google and I found this: Link
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top