ARCHICAD is a 3D architectural design application and BIM from Graphisoft, a Nemetschek Group company headquartered in Budapest.
$240
per month
AutoCAD
Score8.1 out of 10
N/A
AutoCAD is a CAD product from Autodesk. It allows designers to work in 2D and 3D, and is available on Windows and Mac, but with extensive online collaboration tools.
$245
per month
Onshape
Score6.4 out of 10
N/A
Onshape is a cloud-native product development platform with integrated CAD, data management and analytics. Onshape aims to accelerate time to market and improve innovation by: 1) Access: Unlike file-based CAD which is on-premise only, Onshape enables remote access for designers and engineers from anywhere, and on any internet-connected device -including tablets and smart phones. 2) Collaboration: Onshape aims to eliminate the version control problems and blocking of file-based…
$1,500
per year per user
Pricing
ARCHICAD
AutoCAD
Onshape
Editions & Modules
Archicad Solo Version
$240
per month
Archicad Full Version
$280
per month
Monthly Subscription
$245
per month per user
Yearly Subscription
$1975
per year per user
3-Year Subscription
$5925
3 years per user
Standard
1,500
per year per user
Professional
2,500
per year per user
Enterprise
Contact sales team
per year per user
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ARCHICAD
AutoCAD
Onshape
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
No dedicated hardware is required. Works on all web-connected devices including tablet, Chromebook, iPhone, Android.
Mathematics Teacher in Engineering at Kenyatta University (Civil Engineering, 201-500 employees)
Chose ARCHICAD
AutoCAD uses line works in actual presentation whiles ARCHICAD uses real structural walls which are easy to use and present compared to line works. Revit largely and mainly focused on structural design and is more complex to use compared to ARCHICAD which helps one focus on …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Center Head at iNIFD (Education Management, 51-200 employees)
Chose ARCHICAD
ARCHICAD is more intuitive and user friendly tool than AutoCAD. In this day and age, we need a minimalistic approach tool that can help us create smart designs with right user experience. The custom libraries and design options of ARCHICAD gives us better design variations in …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Verified User
Chose ARCHICAD
On the first hand, ARCHICHAD offers more versatility in modeling complex geometric shapes and forms. ARCHICHAD also offers greater flexibility for customization and the development of add-ons and extensions. This allows users to tailor the software to their specific needs and …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Autodesk
Verified User
Chose AutoCAD
AutoCAD is used more widely which makes collaboration easier. Learning curve for ARCHICAD didn't outweigh cost differences.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Verified User
Chose AutoCAD
for the developing of 2d drawings AutoCAD is more suitable than other software due to its very easy and understandable user interface. besides that, due to the orientation of the software to 2d drawings, the library of commands is better structured and organized, making the …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
CX in Customer Service at Obra (Design, 1-10 employees)
Chose AutoCAD
AutoCAD is more complete and offers more resources in general besides the great majority of professionals in the market using it, which facilitates the transfer of files between teams without any problem and the learning of the software that remains very similar in years. It …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Architectural Surveyor in Professional Services at HLM Group (Design, 1-10 employees)
Chose AutoCAD
We have always used AutoCAD for 2D drafting. AutoCAD LT is great for working on 2D projects, especially in the field. We do need full AutoCAD on the workstations to interface with point cloud and support 3D modeling programs.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Verified User
Chose AutoCAD
Much easier to use then Revit, but much more simple.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
PTC
Verified User
Chose Onshape
We chose Onshape for its ease of use and ultimately its mobility. Our mobile team wanted to be able to do work anywhere with a solid internet connection, instead of having to rely on bulky and tethered desktop machines or high powered laptops. All of Autodesk's products, while …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Verified User
Chose Onshape
I've used Solidworks for Cad and it is very heavy/intense software. Onshape is lightweight and easy to use. Solidworks has more add-ons like simulation and stress analysis which Onshape doesn't.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
ARCHICAD, is well suited in presenting all desired projects in building and construction works more so where the client has just an idea but lacks the actual picture in mind. When doing all commercial buildings where proper records and evidence is record is needed, ARCHICAD should be considered. Projects which involve complex and large volumes of labor require well-presented drawings or representation done with ARCHICAD for proper and easy execution. ARCHICAD is less appropriate for small jobs like shades which are not complex and need less attention.
Once again, for jobs/companies where you are doing a lot of design and modelling of tanks, pipework or filling machine or basic electronics its fantastic as a 3D and 2D modelling tool, however once again when it comes to testing these actual products in the real world, I feel like AutoCAD is let down by its clunky fitting and spec management and also in very limited in-house engineering simulations.
Onshape shall be used by organizations where cost is a major factor as the license is relatively competitive than the competition. Where Onshape , excels the most is the ability to be operational on any device with internet connection and webbrowser. Onshape doesn't require your hardware to be beefed with Graphic cards (if added better). Where onshape can be better. If they are able to include simulation packages bundled like SOLIDWORKS.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
ArchiCAD lacks a few feature sets, including an automatic Keynote database extraction system, an expandable Phasing/Options manager, and an easy way to transfer standard details into a project.
The Revision/Change Manager, as well as the new Stair and Railing tools, while impressively flexible, are too complex to set up and customize.
It is an underdog product. Revit has a market share because it spends more money on marketing, and less on product development.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
User Interface Customisation: AutoCAD's user interface could benefit from more robust customisation options. Allowing users to rearrange toolbars, menus, and panels according to their specific workflows and preferences would enhance productivity.
Enhanced 3D Modeling Tools: While AutoCAD is capable of 3D modeling, it's not as intuitive or feature-rich as dedicated 3D modeling software. Streamlining the process and adding more advanced modeling tools would be a welcome improvement.
Enhanced Collaboration and Version Control: AutoCAD could improve its collaboration tools, such as real-time editing and version tracking, to facilitate smoother teamwork, especially in multi-disciplinary projects.
Intelligent Object Libraries: AutoCAD could benefit from an expanded and more intelligent library of standard objects and components. This would save time for designers who often have to create custom components from scratch.
Dimensioning a hole feature in a drawing when there are multiple holes, the hole count does not parametrically update. For example, when there are 3x of the same hole, Onshape forces you to manually type in 3x instead of parametrically populating the hole count. This gets very dangerous if say, one of the 3x holes changes but you forget to update the 3x to 2x. Other CAD software does provide this.
I know Onshape provides guidance on performance considerations and how to structure a project through their literature, however, a dedicated video from Onshape that directly addresses the guidelines on how to minimize file load and reload times would be beneficial to all future and current Onshape users. I think they should incorporate this directly in their training. Poindexter by Design went through the growing pains of this issue but through the Onshape literature and our own experiences we've developed guidelines on how to keep our Onshape performance maximized!
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Because rarely we [would] rather wait for a whole year to update, sometimes the new updates don't bring many new features and we are still ok with the current version. Also the change of interface is always something that takes time for every partner in the company to get comfortable with. So those are the main reasons we may want to keep the same version.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Familiarity and ability to work from any location. Also easy to cooperate with potential customers, existing customers, systems users, and fabricating shops. Most of the standard designs are now in On Shape and I would like to continue using it. It is easier to run versions to clarify imrovements to the previous designs
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
It is very usable once you understand the program. I believe there is room for improvement in the 2D to 3D modeling capability. We have to use other apps to 3D model and that can be time consuming and sometimes AutoCAD doesn't transfer work that well between apps. They can improve there.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
We have rapid responses from their support team, and they often go the extra mile to pinpoint the root cause of an issue and assist the team in resolving it. They are honest when a problem is down to user error, or a glitch on the version we are on.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
AutoCAD has the issue of crashing or slowing down the design procedure once a heavy design that includes several disciplines or multiple families/blocks is involved. Customer services gets the feedback from the crash reports but this issue seems like it has never been addressed in the software updates past several years.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Been fairly standard experience with support team. Issues have always been addressed, but is understandably focused on business side applications which typically has different issues than education applications. I have very few IT issues with the design side of the software, my issues are more often with the control of users and access
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
I might be biased by coming from using three different CAD softwares in the past, so I already understood many modeling concepts, but the training OS offers is really good. Videos are clear, they explain operations in good detail and besides that OS has a really good help system that explains even more how every tool works.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
the implementation was realy easy , to set up our workstation we pay for the licenses we are about to use , there was a little bit of delay to get the payment processed to receive the serial but after that the install runs without any problem , so you can fell secure there will be not issue with the implementation.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Onshape is revolutionary. Its advantage is that it can be used without having to download it. You are free to work wherever you want. This means that even if you take a vacation or attend a family event, your work will not be interrupted. You can still bring your work and complete it quickly.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
On the first hand, ARCHICHAD offers more versatility in modeling complex geometric shapes and forms. ARCHICHAD also offers greater flexibility for customization and the development of add-ons and extensions. This allows users to tailor the software to their specific needs and workflows, enhancing productivity and efficiency. While both ARCHICHAD and Revit offer rendering capabilities, ARCHICHAD's built-in rendering engine, CineRender, is better for its ease of use and high-quality output.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
I use Revit far more than I use AutoCAD. AutoCAD is great for simple linework, but even then I will often create the lines in Revit and then export to AutoCAD for final touches and printing. AutoCAD is a bit easier for large-format prints, which is why I almost always end up using it after starting in Revit.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
I have used SOLIDWORKS for over four years, and the vault system is time intensive for control of design history, and revision management. I have used Pro-E for over four years, and this has the capability but is not user-friendly. Not needing high-end computers is another great reason to choose Onshape
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info