Does a Qualified Hardware Chart exist for AutoCAD?

[DoctorCarlo]

Does a Qualified Hardware Chart exist for AutoCAD? I have found one for four of the twenty-seven AutoDesk programs. They were clear as a bell. Five others featured minimum system requirements for only the processor. The remaining either had "404" links or no links at all.

Am I asking too much for a Qualified Hardware Chart for AutoCAD?

I am building a custom system for AutoCAD and I would like to refer to some clear-cut specifications.

[Anonymous]

Hi Doctor Carlo,

It's the nature of the beast that the variables associated with usage
are so extreme that it is not really possible to say much more than
"more and faster is better"

Although I think he lives in fantasy land, recently there was a user in
the newsgroups saying that 1Mb RAM, Vista 32bit is fast adequate for
everything he does in AutoCAD.

I think there is little doubt that Civil 3D is the most resource hungry
of the Autodesk programs and the range of file sizes reported in Civil
3D newsgroups vary by factors of more than 10, so what is normal OK for
one user will be inadequate for another.

If I was buying/building a new computer I'd say:

Win 7 64 bit - don't even think of anything else.
Unless you are planning to work in small files (Sub 1Mb) 8Gb RAM(some
RAM comes in 3Gb modules, so 9Gb or 12Gb may be appropriate)
Enough 10,000RPM hard disks that RAID 5 is workable for the data drives
O/S and software on separate drive so that imaging is easy.
The two biggest monitors which fit on your desk
Upper mid range Intel processor as the speed increments for the dearest
ones don't warrant the cost.
I know next to nothing about graphics cards, but there is plenty of
information around and what's accurate today will be out of date next week.


Regards,


Laurie Comerford

DoctorCarlo wrote:
> Does a Qualified Hardware Chart exist for AutoCAD? I have found one for four of the twenty-seven AutoDesk programs. They were clear as a bell. Five others featured minimum system requirements for only the processor. The remaining either had "404" links or no links at all.
>
> Am I asking too much for a Qualified Hardware Chart for AutoCAD?
>
> I am building a custom system for AutoCAD and I would like to refer to some clear-cut specifications.
>

[Anonymous]

I agree with Laurie.

For the processor: Intel Core i7, Core i5, or Core 2 Quad. A Core 2 Duo
will work, but the upgrade charge for quad processors is not that much to go
to Core 2 Quad with similar speeds. Intel is kicking AMD's butt right now,
so go Intel.

RAM: 2 GB bare bones minimum for LT, 3 GB for 2D work on full AutoCAD, 4 GB
for most applications, 8 -12 GB for C3D and other intense vertical packages.

Video card: Biggest fastest Nvidia Geforce or ATI Radeon you can afford.
Don't waste money on OpenGL cards unless you have a program that requires
it. AutoCAD and most vertical products don't, but some other program may.
I run C3D and my budget was tight, so I went with a Geforce GTS 250 with 1
GB of video ram. Works ok, but not as fast with large images (200 MB) as I
would like. I am not sure if the bottle neck for the images is the video
processor, video ram, main processor, regular ram, or hard drive at this
point. I have ordered more regular RAM to go from 4 GB to 8 GB.

Brad
C3D 2010 on Vista Business 64 SP 2
3.0 GHz Core 2 Quad Q9650
4 GB going to 8 GB RAM
Geforce GTS 250
250 GB hard drive for OS & software
1 TB network drive, RAID 10

"Laurie" wrote in message
news:6310321@discussion.autodesk.com...
Hi Doctor Carlo,

It's the nature of the beast that the variables associated with usage
are so extreme that it is not really possible to say much more than
"more and faster is better"

Although I think he lives in fantasy land, recently there was a user in
the newsgroups saying that 1Mb RAM, Vista 32bit is fast adequate for
everything he does in AutoCAD.

I think there is little doubt that Civil 3D is the most resource hungry
of the Autodesk programs and the range of file sizes reported in Civil
3D newsgroups vary by factors of more than 10, so what is normal OK for
one user will be inadequate for another.

If I was buying/building a new computer I'd say:

Win 7 64 bit - don't even think of anything else.
Unless you are planning to work in small files (Sub 1Mb) 8Gb RAM(some
RAM comes in 3Gb modules, so 9Gb or 12Gb may be appropriate)
Enough 10,000RPM hard disks that RAID 5 is workable for the data drives
O/S and software on separate drive so that imaging is easy.
The two biggest monitors which fit on your desk
Upper mid range Intel processor as the speed increments for the dearest
ones don't warrant the cost.
I know next to nothing about graphics cards, but there is plenty of
information around and what's accurate today will be out of date next week.


Regards,


Laurie Comerford

DoctorCarlo wrote:
> Does a Qualified Hardware Chart exist for AutoCAD? I have found one for
> four of the twenty-seven AutoDesk programs. They were clear as a bell.
> Five others featured minimum system requirements for only the processor.
> The remaining either had "404" links or no links at all.
>
> Am I asking too much for a Qualified Hardware Chart for AutoCAD?
>
> I am building a custom system for AutoCAD and I would like to refer to
> some clear-cut specifications.
>

[DoctorCarlo]

Thank you for the intelligent reply.

I guess that your recommendation of Windows 7 (over my preference for XP 64-bit) makes perfect sense as DirectX10 won't work in XP regardless. And of course, Vista doesn't even enter the discussion.

I am supplying information to a computer store and at this point, I have a budget of $1000. I "only" need a system that will run AutoCAD without too much trouble; I am a student at ITT Tech, learning CAD. So while there is a realistic need to get properly equipped with a little room left over to allow the system to last a good while (some years), I also have to put together a machine for as little as possible.

This is why I was hoping to find a qualified hardware list that lists, specifically by manufacturer and model, what has been proven to work properly with AutoCAD; AutoDesk has published such exact lists for its higher-end products such as Maya, 3ds Max, Mudbox, and MotionBuilder. With such a list, I can shop for the least expensive items that I can be assured will work; thus, doing what I can to keep within this preliminary budget of $1000.

I won't be paying for assembly or a system warranty; the computer store will ship me the parts and I'll put it together.

The $1000 limit is preliminary as the Deptartment of Vocational Rehabilitation will be paying for it; and a request for a higher amount would entail some extra work on the part of my DVR counselor. I am just trying to spare her that extra effort, if I can.

[Anonymous]

wrote in message news:6310638@discussion.autodesk.com...
>I guess that your recommendation of Windows 7 (over my preference for XP
>64-bit) makes perfect sense as DirectX10 won't work in XP regardless.
_______________
Well, AutoCAD will run on DX9 anyway, so you could stick with XP-64 if you
really wanted to (we do at our office for the moment).

[Anonymous]

Virtually anything available today will work. The question becomes what
will work well. An Atom chip will work, but the speed limitations will
drive you crazy, as will built-in graphics. Key items to look for:
hard-drive speed and memory, number and speed of cores ( 2 or more
cores, speed more important than quantity) and a decent video card, but
the for a higher speed video card is dependent upon the actual field of
use that you specialize in.

DoctorCarlo wrote:
> Thank you for the intelligent reply.
>
> I guess that your recommendation of Windows 7 (over my preference for XP 64-bit) makes perfect sense as DirectX10 won't work in XP regardless. And of course, Vista doesn't even enter the discussion.
>
> I am supplying information to a computer store and at this point, I have a budget of $1000. I "only" need a system that will run AutoCAD without too much trouble; I am a student at ITT Tech, learning CAD. So while there is a realistic need to get properly equipped with a little room left over to allow the system to last a good while (some years), I also have to put together a machine for as little as possible.
>
> This is why I was hoping to find a qualified hardware list that lists, specifically by manufacturer and model, what has been proven to work properly with AutoCAD; AutoDesk has published such exact lists for its higher-end products such as Maya, 3ds Max, Mudbox, and MotionBuilder. With such a list, I can shop for the least expensive items that I can be assured will work; thus, doing what I can to keep within this preliminary budget of $1000.
>
> I won't be paying for assembly or a system warranty; the computer store will ship me the parts and I'll put it together.
>
> The $1000 limit is preliminary as the Deptartment of Vocational Rehabilitation will be paying for it; and a request for a higher amount would entail some extra work on the part of my DVR counselor. I am just trying to spare her that extra effort, if I can.

[DoctorCarlo]

Thanks to all for the helpful information. The configuration that I have proposed to the vendor seems to be sufficient for my needs. As it is, I am running AutoCAD on a Dell Poweredge Server with a Pentium 4 and 1.5GB of memory. Given that at this time, I am only making elementary use of the program, it is performing within reason.

I guess that the expense of producing an Approved Hardware Chart for every single product is simply more than Autodesk feels is necessary. At least such charts that do exist for the more heavy-duty programs will lead me by the hand in the far-flung future.

[Anonymous]

The hardware changes so fast and AutoCAD changes annually, that Autodesk
only puts out recommended and minimums on an annual basis for the new
version of AutoCAD and the verticals. I guess I assumed you already saw
this page:

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/pc/index?siteID=123112&id=13784795

When learning, your needs are minimal until you get into verticals. I still
run LT 2010 on a P4, but that is with 3 GB of ram. I want a new computer
this year to replace it. It is not bad for LT, but a new computer for
commercial use is pretty cheap compared to the value of my time.

Brad
C3D 2010 on Vista Business 64 SP 2
LT 2010 on XP Pro SP 3

wrote in message news:6311716@discussion.autodesk.com...
Thanks to all for the helpful information. The configuration that I have
proposed to the vendor seems to be sufficient for my needs. As it is, I am
running AutoCAD on a Dell Poweredge Server with a Pentium 4 and 1.5GB of
memory. Given that at this time, I am only making elementary use of the
program, it is performing within reason.

I guess that the expense of producing an Approved Hardware Chart for every
single product is simply more than Autodesk feels is necessary. At least
such charts that do exist for the more heavy-duty programs will lead me by
the hand in the far-flung future.