Hello to all I have a question on AutoCAD Architecture vs Revit Architecture which is better? I have recently have been laid off after 15 years plus. I currently use AutoCAD Architecture 2010 and have DataCAD experience too. I started out on Board Drafting but love the CAD side of it much better. I'm looking to enhance my CAD skills and was wondering if anyone can tell me about Revit Architecture software? I have no experience and knowledge of it. Is it any better easier to use then AutoCAD? Where I worked we did not get into the 3D side for building renderings but with the economy bad I'm looking to enhance my CAD skills to better obtain a new job! I would like to possibly take a CAD course to learn 3D rendering skills. Any input on this will be most helpful.
Learning REVIT is a plus: many mid and large firms are at least introducing
the program if not starting to switch base building teams to it and running
it over ACA.
REVIT Arch, even more so that ACA, requires you to have a more intimate
understanding of how content/objects/details go together, and it is very
different from ACA, so expect an initial steep learning curve. Once there,
and with frequent use, it's easy to maintain.
But ACA still has a place and is widely used, so don't let that skill drop
Rendering, with either program, still also requires a bit of an artistic
eye, and a good ability to touch up images in Photoshop helps. Neither is
easier to use for rendering over the other.
There are LOTS of threads on this topic, just do a search.
These days it's not so much about which is the better software, more so on where the industry is headed. If you do a survey of the employers in your area, you might find they prefer one over the other. If you learn both though, that'd make you even more valuable.
Dean Thanks for your reply! I have done some searching on the Discussion Group Site on Revit and was wondering does Revit handle doing details and sections well like ACA? From what I seen so far Revit appears to be more of a 3D rendering type software. Thanks David
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 12:44:03 +0000, goldcamaro <> wrote:
>Matt could you elaborate more on your choice?
Dang, I had a feeling you were gonna ask.
Probably not without getting yelled at I was hoping to keep the discussion
> Do you like Revit better than ACA for doing details, sections and such? Thanks, David
There are some things I like ACA/AutoCAD for. Details is - right now - one of
them. I _personally_ don't like drafting in Revit as much as ACA for details. I
just don't think the general linework drafting capabilities are as easy to use
as those in AutoCAD/ACA, but that's a side effect of knowing AutoCAD inside out
and being fairly new to Revit.
But that's me; plenty of people are the exact opposite and can produce exquisite
details in Revit. I just do not believe it is as easy - yet. I fully expect this
opinion to change within the next 6 months.
One thing I will say is that text editing in Revit is cruelty defined.
Formatting is almost non-existent. This has been a huge fix-it-now item for some
time, do here's hoping that 2011 addresses it (crossing fingers).
One of Revit's strengths are in how it forces you to rethink things. One common
complaint from newbies (including me) is that Revit's OOTB elevations may look
flat. But you have the ability to easily turn on shadows and edit linework in
ways that can create truly excellent drawings that are more communcative with
less effort. They can be a combination of a presentation and construction
drawing graphics, which I think is way ahead of what is normally done in
But what I love about Revit over ACA is how easy it is to do the "big picture"
stuff. Put simply, you can do 90% of your work much more easily than you can in
ACA. You can go from mass/conceptual modeling presentations right into
plan/elevation/sections with lighting speed, and keep it all under one roof.
Your workflow is very linear; you don't have to "drop out" of the process to do
a 3D rendering or a design option; it's all built in. Because the Project
Browser isn't an "option" as Project Navigator is with ACA, you are always
working under a comprehensive project context at all times.
From a day to day management side, you don't have half of the issues to deal
with under Revit. You don't have layers, which is particularly valuable
considering the thousands of hoops you have to jump through when dealing with
materials and display representations in ACA. You don't have to deal with
Property Set Definitions, which I have always had a hard time wrapping my head
around. Instead you deal with fairly-easy-for-humans-to-comprehend Parameters.
Aside from handling installations, template creation, and family content,
there's almost zero CAD management to deal with. In fact I think Revit is
revolutionary for the way that normal users can easily take on pseudo-CAD
Management roles inside an organization without tripping everyone else up in the
process. With ACA, you really need a strong hand behind the tiller to keep
everyone from driving off into the tall weeds.
However, what I absolutely love about Revit is how HARD it is to draw
incorrectly. With temporary dimensions, onscreen graphics, and constraints, you
are much more likely to draw something right than wrong. In ACA and AutoCAD it's
almost the reverse.
I agree with much of what Matt has said, but I would take issue with the statement on drawing incorrectly. In addition to the fact that nothing is foolproof (because fools are so ingenious), I find drawing acurately in Revit to be extremely difficult, particularly placing an object where I want it the first time. The temporary dimensions can be useful, but they always seem to go to a different object than the one from which I want to dimension. I find myself drawing a lot more temporary construction lines to be able to figure out where things should go. (It does not help that the first Revit project on which I am working has a radial structural grid - both long-side exterior walls are convex, so the wall angles change from room to room on the exterior rooms.) The automatic alignment thingy (equivalent to Object Snap Tracking in ACA/AutoCAD) is nice, when it works, but I find it often does not choose the alignment point I want, and I have yet to find a way to control it (if it can be controlled - I use the Shift to Acquire option in ACA to avoid getting points I do not want). And it appears that text only aligns with other text, not linework, which is really frustrating. View clipping and sheet composition also is all eyeballing, no precision or ability to reproduce the exact same results.
Perhaps much of my frustration stems from my newbie status with Revit, but I really miss having an exposed coordinate system. The project I am on has multiple linked files (created by others outside my firm), and we have had a hard time getting them aligned properly (no insertion points!).
I am still too green to comment on the control of graphics and visibility, but currently find this somewhat frustrating. But I am liking the way you can create parametrically driven content.