AutoCAD Architecture - Mobile workstation guidance

[Tallans422]

Hello Forum!

I'm looking for some guidance on picking out a new mobile workstation.  Our supplier has only a couple in stock that I would consider and they're trading off processor speed for GPU memory.  I know CPU base clock speed is vital but going down to a 4GB GPU with the first option makes me cringe a bit... We primarily use AutoCAD Architecture with Accurender NXT for rendering, but we have groups that also use Revit, Sketchup, and Photoshop.  I’d appreciate any input!

Option 1

Lenovo ThinkPad P15 G2

Xeon W-11855M 3.2 GHz (4.9 Turbo) 18 MB Cache

 2x16GB DDR4 SDRAM

1TB O2 SSD

RTXA2000 GPU (4GB)

Option 2

Lenovo ThinkPad P15 G2

Core i7-11800H 2.3 GHz (4.6 Turbo) 24 MB Cache

 2x16GB DDR4 SDRAM

1TB O2 SSD

RTXA4000 GPU (8GB)

[ The subject line of this post has been edited for clarity by @handjonathan Original: Mobile workstation guidance ]

[pendean]

AutoCAD/ARCH (topic of this forum) cannot take advantage of XEON processors, it's old-school, a single processor is it. Your other listed software will, but you need to be asking over at those forums/websites for guidance.

[rwrightWMDSY]

I would go with option 2.  As previously stated, AutoCAD will work with but won't use the full capability of the Xeon processor.  The other reason is that the i7 machine has 8gb GPU with AutoCAD you want all the memory you can get.   I'm using an early generation i7 machine with Architecture 2023 and often working on some fairly complex drawings and am quite happy with how that's working out.

[dan908]

I like either. Considering I represent hardware certification for AutoCAD - I can confidently say functionally either is fine for the machine working with ACA.

But you would probably also like performance suggestions... like the other two posts, I have complaints about option 1. Most RTX A2000's come with 6 or 8 GB VRAM. I actually double checked the Lenovo website. 4 GB is not the brand new A2000 standard (our certification is on 6GB model). The A2000 is a solid mid-level performer though. A4000 is better but I am guessing $300-500 more. If it is like $100 more you get a better deal with option 2, but if budget is really a concern - the AutoCAD engineering standard laptop is option 1 specs. I like the CPU (option 2 might run the fan a bit more as it works hard), I like 32 GB RAM, if budget allows go with the A4000 you get more out of it, if budget doesn't, it is still going to be fast. Our graphics system just won't have as much memory to cache too. A2000 and A4000 both have ddr6 memory so they'll both be fast.

That's all I have. That's a reasonable Revit machine in option 2 also. Option 1 is ok for Revit, but Revit is definitely going to like the A4000. Maybe a mix of the two machines Revit and power users get the more expensive option?

[dan908]

A little more research, that looks like the 2021 spec A2000 with slightly slower memory and half as much as the current version. Still fine, but who doesn't want the best or a good deal on last year's model. The A4000 spec looks like what I'm used to, so it probably is. The option 1 should really be cheaper with that A2000 spec. 

[nrz13]

I'd definitely go with option 2. You're unlikely to notice 0.3 GHz difference in the turbo boost, but you very well could notice the graphics difference, especially for 3D modeling and in your other programs.

[Tallans422 · Accepted solution]

Thank you all for your input!  I'm going to proceed with option 2 for our needs.