PC Minimum Requirements

[Anonymous]

What are the real minimum requirements for a PC with Revit 6.1 and AutoCAD 2005? I have been told that a Pentium 4 w/512 RAM and XP Pro is recommended but what about Celeron and Athelon chipsets and using XP Home? Is there a major difference between a 400 MHz and 800 MHz bus speeds? My office is on a tight budget and the cost of upgrading to multiple copies of Revit has put a cramp into what new PCs we can afford.

[Anonymous]

http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=3690 here you find a benchmark test on PC's running Revit There a great value on such deccisions Nic "Ron Finger" wrote in message news:414f3470$1_3@newsprd01... > What are the real minimum requirements for a PC with Revit 6.1 and AutoCAD > 2005? I have been told that a Pentium 4 w/512 RAM and XP Pro is > recommended but what about Celeron and Athelon chipsets and using XP Home? > > Is there a major difference between a 400 MHz and 800 MHz bus speeds? > > My office is on a tight budget and the cost of upgrading to multiple > copies of Revit has put a cramp into what new PCs we can afford.

[sbrown]

What size projects do you do? Do you do a lot of renderings? Will you be using workset?

As a rule of thumb don't ever use Celeron processors for CADD applications, they are a stripped down processor, basically for low end home users who just surf and email.

A decent system would be a 3 gig processor(AMD or INTEL hyperthreaded) and min 1 gig of ram, 2 gig if you will do ALOT of renderings. Get the cheapest video card you can find. More ram on the video card currently doesn't help anything. Do a search on AUGI for recommended cards. But less is more in that area.

A good route to go for low budgets is dells refurbished outlet, the computers are all warrantied same as new and you can find great deals.

[Anonymous]

Don't trust reviews-they never reflect real life experiences. Our office has some IBM Intellistation M's, bought surplus at end of life cycle, and a Compaq and a Xi workstation. The IBMs NEVER present a problem, but the Compaq and the Xi are junk. Factor in the time and aggravation you'll spend on junk computers. Do you really need Revit?. You could pay for the computers just by switching to a lower cost software. If you really need Revit, then you need to spend what is required to make it work.

[BOBKELLERMAN]

Similar to what others say: why pay for Mercedes software (hopefully) and ask if you can run it on Hyundai computers? NO second tier chips, except for non-CAD people in the office, is the only smart way (but the 2nd or 3rd highest P4 is cheaper than the latest and nearly as good.). 512 ram for plain AutoCAD only is OK. Good idea to have 2 gigs on the machine of the person who renders most.
Better to leave Revit off one machine, if you have someone who is using the AutoCAD more, and put the money into proper equipment, in my opinion. And Revit 7 ought to be imminent: looking to see if there was any news is what brought me here.
Good Luck!!
Bob

[Anonymous]

Bob, if you're looking for Revit 7 news, there are several threads running over on Augi.com about it... My first Revit machine: Dual PIII 933 Dell w/ 512 megs. Worked, but painful slow sometimes. And that was with Revit 3.1, which wasn't as fast as Revit 6 is. My next Revit machine: Dual Xeon 2.4 Dell w/2 gigs. Took anything I threw at it, Revit 4.5, 5.1, or 6. My current Revit machine: P4 3.0 HT Sager w/1 gig. Works fantastic. Only run into problems with rendering very large scenes with lots of plants. and I'm working on redistental apartment buildings the size of city blocks (for full cd's). It can be slow sometimes, like when regenning a full sheet of complex elevations or something, but I think that's because of my ATI drivers... So, anyways, get a P4 & a gig of Ram. Without, you can learn Revit, yes, and do houses and smaller projects- but not anything large or complex. Revit's a bit of a beast in this department. ;-) Jeffrey BOBKELLERMAN wrote: > Similar to what others say: why pay for Mercedes software (hopefully) and ask if you can run it on Hyundai computers? NO second tier chips, except for non-CAD people in the office, is the only smart way (but the 2nd or 3rd highest P4 is cheaper than the latest and nearly as good.). 512 ram for plain AutoCAD only is OK. Good idea to have 2 gigs on the machine of the person who renders most. > Better to leave Revit off one machine, if you have someone who is using the AutoCAD more, and put the money into proper equipment, in my opinion. And Revit 7 ought to be imminent: looking to see if there was any news is what brought me here. > Good Luck!! > Bob

[BOBKELLERMAN]

Jeffrey-- I looked, and found only a few hints. I have been asked to do a project in Revit soon. Was hoping to start it in 7. I need a strong brush-up in skills to do this, and optimistically always think the new one will be better/faster/easier, so why learn the old one?
Bob

[Anonymous]

Revit, while growing in leaps and bounds, doesn't suffer from the same constant UI & concept overhaul that many other Autodesk software suffer from. So if you learn 6, 90% of that will apply to 7. I've been using Revit since 3.1, and it's very consistent- yet 6 is many times more capable than 3.1, if I showed them to you side-by-side, you'd think (other than the addition of a few toolbars) the UI looked exactly the same. So you might as well jump in with 6.1. Revit 7, if it follows the usual course, will be out around AU (there is a 'what's new in 7' class at AU, just like last year's 6.0 class). So it should only be a few months. You'll be able to upgrade to 7 when it hits with no pain or 'migration' issues, too, so don't worry about having to restart or redo anything you've started in 6.1. And I'm surprised that your thinking of trying a project in Revit in the first place, Bob, I'm sorry to say. I know that this will offend you, but you're personally part of the reason that I stopped posting to the Autodesk newsgroups until fairly recently- because I was tired of dealing with you and a few others that were really just generally awful (as well as a rather strange lack of proper moderation within the Revit newsgroup, and a rather upsetting bias within the non-Revit groups). You've been one of the more vocal and abrasively negative in the past about Revit in general. Why not stick with your beloved ADT? I'm assuming that your boss must be asking you to give it a try or something, but didn't you give 5 a try and decide that you really didn't like it at all after it didn't work out for you? I'm just rather curuois as to why, but you probably hate me after saying such offensive things, and so I completely understand for you to flame me back and all, as well as refuse to answer a rather personal & professional question that you might not be at liberty to talk about. Anyways, keep an open mind, run through all the tutorials before you do anything else, and post to Augi often for help, forget everything you know about AutoCAD and you'll be fine. ;-) Jeffrey BOBKELLERMAN wrote: > Jeffrey-- I looked, and found only a few hints. I have been asked to do a project in Revit soon. Was hoping to start it in 7. I need a strong brush-up in skills to do this, and optimistically always think the new one will be better/faster/easier, so why learn the old one? > Bob

[Anonymous]

Jeffrey - You said >>because I was tired of dealing with you and a few others that were really just generally awful (as well as a rather strange lack of proper moderation within the Revit newsgroup, and a rather upsetting bias within the non-Revit groups)>> Please know that you have the option of sending in a comment to the moderation/administration team by posting a note to http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/item?siteID=123112&id=3710077. Our team strives to be as hands off as possible to allow free fow of discussion within the guidelines. --- Anne Brown Discussion Groups Administrator Autodesk, Inc. Jeffrey McGrew wrote: > > Revit, while growing in leaps and bounds, doesn't suffer from the same > constant UI & concept overhaul that many other Autodesk software > suffer from. (snip)

[BOBKELLERMAN]

JEFFREY:
First, let me remind you that our professional reputations, and therefore our livelihoods, are affected by what is put out in public about us. My recollection is that I tried to convince you, to no avail, that the Revit discussion was not personal. Kindly either post a quote form me that substantiates what you write above, or retract it publicly.
I never said Revit was terrible, or even bad. My reaction was to Autodesk"s pushing Revit too early, in my view, while publicly knocking its own product, ADT. At this point, the marketplace has not yet responded heavily to Revit.
I always figured that Revit would be worth learning for me about a year and a half after the purchase, after Autodesk had had a chance to work on it.
It took some guts for me to post here, after the drubbing I received in the past for daring to suggest the above. How about some credit for that?
BOB
PS -- Thanks for the information. If you would like my personal email, so you can insult and defame me directly, ask for it.

[Steve_Stafford]

Bob,

Please let me offer my comments on some of your statements...

<...never said Revit was terrible, or even bad...>

Perhaps not those words specifically but more articulate and subtle adjectives that certainly made it clear (to me) what your opinion was/is...and you ARE entitled to your opinion naturally.

<...always figured that Revit would be worth learning for me about a year and a half after the purchase, after Autodesk had had a chance to work on it...>

A prime example of the above, the classic "back handed" compliment...

It is Autodesk Revit now, consider that the same talented team that created Revit then, is the same team working on it now (apparently did well enough to attract Autodesk's attention in the first place)....so let's give them some credit and not make it seem as though Autodesk "took over" or "brushed them aside" to make it "better" or "really work".

Also consider that long range planning for product feature development is typically at least two releases forward thinking. That means that many of the features we use today had been discussed and/or planned for at or about the time Revit was purchased.

The Revit team now benefits from and enjoys Autodesk's financial strength, mgmt's trust and direction, access to the other Autodesk product teams, marketing muscle and clout to be sure...



Perhaps not the market(s) you're familiar with...and perhaps not even true in yours?...since YOU may be doing a project in Revit soon? Besides, paradigm shifts and technology adoption takes time and patience. When it involves architects...more time...and patience.

Last...here's a "drubbing"...Revit was ready for you...you weren't ready for Revit My opinion naturally


Message was edited by: Steve_Stafford


Message was edited by: Steve_Stafford

[BOBKELLERMAN]

Steve, what language are we talking here? To be super clear: no one will find a quote from me saying Revit was no good-- anyplace. Reading it that way was "on you".
And: if you think I implied that there was something inherently bad about Revit that Autodesk need to fix, I didn't. I just thought it was not ready for the mainstream then, especially not similar enough in interface to other Autodesk products for ME. And sure, I resented having it pushed at me.
My original degree is in marketing from UC Berkeley. For me, "market place acceptance" means substantial sales, in proportion to the sales effort. If Revit has achieved that already, I am not aware, and I apologize.
The project am have been asked to do, freelance (not for a boss that is shoving it on me) is intended as a demonstration of Revit. paid for by someone who sells it, and may or may not be built. You guys assume too much about me, and hang on to this old stuff too much.
Time marches on and opinions evolve.
Bob

[Steve_Stafford]

Just the language of subtly...you DO recognise what I mean at least? You provide a complimentary statement and then provide a qualifier that undoes the value of the compliment.

I don't have a degree in marketing and only recently read two books on the subject and found them fascinating. I believe you are correct, Revit is not a "mainstream" product yet...

Have you read Geoffrey Moore's books "Crossing the Chasm" or "Inside the Tornado". I found them very interesting...my thanks to Leonid for making me aware of them in another thread in this ng.

The mainstream market does not create value it just recognizes, commits to it, later...and then dumps a great deal of money on the vendor when they finally catch on.

Assumptions? Old stuff?...fair enough as long as you're not also calling me "old"...here's to opinions evolving!

Cheers!

[Anonymous]

BOBKELLERMAN wrote: > JEFFREY: > I never said Revit was terrible, or even bad. My reaction was to Autodesk"s pushing Revit too early, in my view, while publicly knocking its own product, ADT. At this point, the marketplace has not yet responded heavily to Revit. This is true. I looked at all your old posts here & within the ADT newsgroups. You never said within the newsgroups that Revit was terrible. I'm sorry, I had you confused with Brian Harder. I'm very sorry, and I do retract my post. I hope you can accept my apology. I'm sorry for over-reacting a bit. Having to constantly argue with all the ADT folks, when I'm just trying to help people out, or when just trying to correct misconceptions or outright misinformation about Revit, EVEN WITHIN THE REVIT NEWSGROUP, has made me more than a little touchy about things. I'm simply trying to share knowledge of what I think is a great tool, and having to constantly deal with a whole group of people who are adamantly ageist it (yet don't understand it in the least) has really worn my nerves a little raw, and made me bitter. So, for the most part, I've abandoned posting to the newsgroups and to AUGI, and just focus on running the local Revit user's group here, where I don't have to constantly justify Revit's mere existence. So again, I'm sorry for thinking you were someone else, and posting a negivtive comment about you. All you've ever said was that Revit wasn't ready for prime-time in your opinion, which you're more than entitled to. I do disagree with you on that issue, which I bet you'd probably be able to guess. :-) Best of luck on your project, and if you need any help, please post away or even e-mail me straight. I'm in San Francisco, seems like you're in Southern California, there are lots of Revit folk down there & a user's group too. Best of luck, Jeffrey McGrew

[Anonymous]

Bob: just heard that 7.0 will ship beginning of December, and that it will be released on the web end of October. Don't know much else about it, but today is the 'announcement day' apparently, and so we should see something from Autodesk soon about what's going to be in 7. Jeffrey BOBKELLERMAN wrote: > JEFFREY: > First, let me remind you that our professional reputations, and therefore our livelihoods, are affected by what is put out in public about us. My recollection is that I tried to convince you, to no avail, that the Revit discussion was not personal. Kindly either post a quote form me that substantiates what you write above, or retract it publicly. > I never said Revit was terrible, or even bad. My reaction was to Autodesk"s pushing Revit too early, in my view, while publicly knocking its own product, ADT. At this point, the marketplace has not yet responded heavily to Revit. > I always figured that Revit would be worth learning for me about a year and a half after the purchase, after Autodesk had had a chance to work on it. > It took some guts for me to post here, after the drubbing I received in the past for daring to suggest the above. How about some credit for that? > BOB > PS -- Thanks for the information. If you would like my personal email, so you can insult and defame me directly, ask for it.

[BOBKELLERMAN]

Thanks, Jeffrey. Next time, may I suggest that whether its me or someone else, you go a bit gentler. Being from San Francisco also, I say just bite into a sourdough baguette, and leave the keyboard alone.
Bob