ArchiCAD and Revit Evaluation Criteria

[Anonymous]

Greetings,

We're a mid-size architectural firm (50-75 people) located on the East Coast of the US specializing in commercial, educational, higher education, retail, and corporate markets. We've been using AutoCAD and ADT for quite some time now with SketchUp being used almost exclusively for all SD and DD imaging. We've come to the conclusion that these tools have out lived their usefulness.

We've started an evaluation process looking at both ArchiCAD and Revit. Our team (8 people) will be professionally trained by outside consultants so they can competently evaluating both tools.

We need suggestions on what type of information gets included in our evaluation criteria. Has anyone gone through this process with both programs? If so, can you give us any tips or directions on what we should be looking for? What are the current advantages and pitfalls to using either program?

Is ArchiCAD generally better than Revit?

Thanks I advance for any replies. We’ll keep everyone updated on our evaluation process.

mj2

[TomWaltz]

"Let Mortal Kombat begin!"

We need suggestions on what type of information gets included in our evaluation criteria

It depends. What does your company want from them? I think you need to define what you are looking for in general before you start thinking about how to compare the software.

I suspect in this group, you will find a lot of arguments for Archicad over Revit. Compared to Autocad/ADT, you will find dramatic improvements in either product.

Personally, I think both Archicad and Revit are fine products but they have some differences. Very few people have an intimate working knowledge of both. You wil probably have to study each and decide which one fits your specific needs best.

[David Pacifico]

Hello MJ2
Here is a short list.

Look and Feel? (intangable right)
How do you have multiple people work on the same project at the same time?
How do you exchange information with people/consultants out-of house?
What types of libraries are available for the work you do?
How do you make your own library parts?
What type of visualization are you going to need?
How does the software handle a sizable project, you are likely to do?

I would suggest taking a project that is already done and putting it through the test. This way you are not trying to make design judgements at the same time your trying to test software. (sorry it's hard to make it billable)

[Ignacio Azpiazu]

David wrote:
I would suggest taking a project that is already done and putting it through the test. This way you are not trying to make design judgements at the same time your trying to test software. (sorry it's hard to make it billable)

For a 50-75 people office I think it would even make sense to hire for a few weeks a *top* Revit guy and a *top* ArchiCAD guy to set up the test projects/templates, which would then allow you to base your evaluation and training on a state-of-the-art setups custom tailored for your office's needs.
The guy whose program gets picked could then go ahead as part-time consultant/trainer to your CAD managing guy/s. And when you finished your evaluation you make your choice and are ready to go, for both programs you already have a reasonably well battle-tested template you have been using for training for every phase of an office project.
[This is *not* what reseller training involves. It would certainly not be cheap, but the costs are negligible and benefits huge in a 50+ people office.]

[Anonymous]

People here can tell you the pros and cons of ArchiCAD; from what I can see ArchiCAD allows more flexibility when using multiple files to assemble together a large project. Revit's file linking capability is not as extensive, but the programmers are really trying to keep the number of files minimized. AC offers better control of shared projects, though there are ways to prevent changes being made to a Revit project that Revit users have figured out.

If your designs are fairly linear or curvilinear then either product will serve you well enough; Maxonform's inclusion in ArchiCAD makes it the better modeler on its own if you need more advanced geometries. With Revit you can import models from other apps, but I find this to be annoying. The programmers know how to make advanced modeling tools for Revit, but they're too busy working on the multidisciplinary features of the software, which are certainly needed first. (But couldn't they get me a lofting tool in the meantime??)

ArchiCAD's renderer is far and away better than Revit's, which is still stuck at Accurender 3, though you can export to VIZ easily enough. But that's another program again.

With regards to components, AC objects are highly parametric and tend to be well-made over the internet; Revit components (families) are as parametric as the designer decided to make them. Some don't work well at all, or look stupid; others are excellent. It just depends on who made them. There are no standards to this process and not many websites where you can download families. But you can learn to do it yourself with some practice, and at least a couple of people in your office should.

The strong point with Revit is that it is now multidisciplinary, so the virtual building / BIM is tighter; you don't have to use something like Navisworks with whatever your engineers are using. But your consultants also have to switch to Revit, which for structural is a no-brainer. MEP will probably want to wait until the next release of Revit Systems which will probably be March. That is of course if you can get them to switch 😉

Revit is, by most accounts, easier to learn and more intuitive. Schedules work better. All views and schedules are "live" and bidirectional. And the learning part is always the kicker -- a good AC user makes a novice Revit user look rather unproductive.

[Rakela Raul]

anybody suggesting Vectorworks ??

whats wrong with VW, check its web page, another BIM solution !!! landscaping module, planning module, you name it....and belongs to the same family of archicad !!
and much cheaper, cmon VW users !!

[Anonymous]

Working in the one of the larges US construction company I must say that at this point Industry (architecture) is still not very well prepared for real BIM. With over 2 billion $ of work in 2006 we did not finished one single project that was 100% pure BIM out of Architect. Just when I hoped that my next project (250 mil. $ hospital) will be done in Revit, Architect told me that they used Revit only for shell as a reference model.

metanoia wrote:
The strong point with Revit is that it is now multidisciplinary, so the virtual building / BIM is tighter; you don't have to use something like Navisworks with whatever your engineers are using. But your consultants also have to switch to Revit, which for structural is a no-brainer. MEP will probably want to wait until the next release of Revit Systems which will probably be March. That is of course if you can get them to switch Wink

Revit is, by most accounts, easier to learn and more intuitive. Schedules work better. All views and schedules are "live" and bidirectional. And the learning part is always the kicker -- a good AC user makes a novice Revit user look rather unproductive.

Tighter than what, AC or Constructor? It is hard to say - Revit structure is barely used (I don't know one single company that is really using it it is steel in early development phase) Steel guys use they own tools anyway. MEP modeler? Use Constructor and there you have it. No need to use tools like NavisWorks? C'mon. There is no real scheduling in Revit (phasing in not scheduling). No connector to P3 or MS Project. No real Clash detection. At this point tools like NavisWorks are a must. Constructor finally have real connection with Scheduling software, but still no clash detection.
Now Revit easier to learn, hmm I don't know. We had classes of Revit with Paul Aubin (ADT & Revit guru - and really nice guy) and it is not that straight forward as Autodesk paint it. Some guys over here prefer Constructor learning curve. Schedules works better? Again - unfortunately not AC nor Revit have this area really developed. Transport to Excel and compiling data is a must. There is quite bright light in Constructor Tunnel. Estimator. It looks impressive. You will be able finally to create real estimate out of model - finally, but ... it is still in development.

Anyway as some mentioned. Choose it by the best fit to your current situation. And don't ask sells person for advice. Check also both communities. How much help you can get from it.

Good luck and keep us updated.

[Rakela Raul]

Constructor finally have real connection with Scheduling software

im happy and impressed that your company can afford copies of a 10,000 dls software..congrats, i wish i could

[Anonymous]

Hmm.
-First of all it is 8000.
-Second, We are not architects, we don't need to buy like 50 or more licenses.
-Third, Architect's don't need that set of tools. But it gives good communication with construction company - it this kind of benefit that can be a selling point for customer. (it is very important for customer to know that Architects and Contractors can communicate flawlessly)
-Fourth, with the project worth of 250 mil. $ I can buy it knowing that during the life of this one project only (around 3 years) It will pay off many times. Actually we always work (if it is reasonable) on the type of software that Architect is using. Sometimes ADT (but we are running away from it), sometimes Revit, sometimes Constructor. Personally I prefer Constructor. But it's just me (ohhh maybe not only me )

[Rakela Raul]

hey , i just said that im happy and impressed, all positive...i was given a 10 grants number.....i will check again, if it is 8,000 maybe i can get an extra license