We switched from Fabrication AutoCAD MEP to Revit a couple/few years ago, and I'm glad we did. Revit makes it so much easier to actually visualize the building and makes it easier to see structural obstacles such as beams.
Here are a couple of side by side comparisons of what you see drawing in Revit vs drawing in CAD. Technically they were both drawn in Revit, but on the first one architect and engineers used Revit so you can actually see the walls, beams, trusses, everything. The second one everyone else drew in AutoCAD and I put the CAD file in Revit; you can see it's just flat, no depth, nothing.
Revit
AutoCAD
You can see from the side views that the CAD drawing is flat (the pink line is the entire level from floor to ceiling). My piping that I drew with Revit has actual depth and elevation, but the building drawn in AutoCAD has none. The Revit model has an actual building that you can really see.
AutoCAD
Revit
Also, AutoCAD uses "layers" and Revit uses "visibility graphics". In my opinion, Visibility Graphics are much easier to understand. Using walls as an example, it's the difference of one thing that says "walls" and next to it you get the options of how do you want to see it, a percentage of transparency, color, etc. Whereas in CAD you have to try and figure out if walls are layer A-WALL, A-WALL-IDEN, A-WALL-PATT, or sometimes one of 12 or so different things listed under an "A" layer category. There's no consistency with the AutoCAD layers, one architect might have 12 different A-WALL layers for different things about the walls (and different types of walls), and they all label them differently. However, in Revit it's it's always consist and they fall under "walls". Just like instead of a million different layers for duct work there are just visibility graphics categories for duct, duct fittings, duct accessories, air terminals, etc.
AutoCAD
Revit
I'm glad we switched from AutoCAD to Revit.
Revit lives in the land of perfect and doesn't understand what construction is.