ARCHICAD is a 3D architectural design application and BIM from Graphisoft, a Nemetschek Group company headquartered in Budapest.
$240
per month
Autodesk AEC Collection
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
The AEC Collection provides a set of BIM and CAD tools supported by a cloud-based common data environment that facilitates project delivery from early-stage design through to construction. The bundle includes popular Autodesk tools such as Revit, AutoCAD, FormIT, and Navisworks Manage, with access to 12 integrated CAD and BIM tools.
$435
per month per user
Pricing
ARCHICAD
Autodesk AEC Collection
Editions & Modules
Archicad Solo Version
$240
per month
Archicad Full Version
$280
per month
AEC Collection - Monthly Subscription
$435
per month per user
AEC Collection - Yearly Subscription
$3,465
per year per user
AEC Collection - 3-Year Subscription
$10,395
3 years per user
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ARCHICAD
Autodesk AEC Collection
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
ARCHICAD
Autodesk AEC Collection
Considered Both Products
ARCHICAD
Verified User
Anonymous
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 …
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 …
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 …
The feature set in ARCHICAD and integration with various other products is growing year on year and, from conversations with their support, you can see that this is set to continue. It feels genuinely like a product the developers believe in, and they seem to spend the …
Revit is the most widely owned, but it seems clunky, has a complex, non-graphical interface, and is extremely expensive. Bentley also seems overly complex for typical Architecture projects. Sketchup is a great conceptual tool, but becomes very limited with more advanced …
Other products that have been used include Civil Designer and Model Maker for civil services. Other products for structural designs include aq product called "SEDA" These products are not included in the listings.
I have most of my experience in Revit and AutoCAD from the Autodesk AEC Collection. We used SketchUp for a short period of time because of the low cost of the software, but features in Revit, like the analysis tools, scheduling, and more made things faster and gave a more …
Each of these pieces of software has a different use and focus. Some overlap with each other and some are components of Autodesk AEC Collection, such as Autodesk Fabrication CADmep. They are all well designed and powerful applications that help us with everything from planning …
Best suited with: 1) High quality RAM 2) First time users on architectural design 3) Quick layouts with customization Not suitable for: 1) [If] more flexibility in design is required 2) Less RAM 3) Transferring standard details into a project
It is perfect for the completion of designs and drawings which fundamentally covers the main focus of all our projects. It is easy to use and works well for both complicated and simple projects
Design modeling: the user interface allows for a pretty intuitive and integrated creative process. It's great for exploring and communicating ideas, and in cases where the process is not inhibited by the need to switch to different software for different stages of work, such as when moving to develop the design in detail. It also allows for a much more seamless process when changes are requested, so that all material from initial visualizations all the way through to detailed design information are all always in sync and up to date. No redundancy of effort is triggered through the logistics of needing to pass the design through multiple software platforms (eg Sketchup => Revit =>AutoCAD) as each design iteration evolves.
Design documentation: it's reasonably clear that ArchiCAD has the best implementation of BIM in the architectural domain, compared with the nearest rival Revit, and is unmatched for design development and coordination between disciplines, supporting large multidisciplinary teams who can all work simultaneously via the cloud or a local server on the same integrated model.
Somewhat responsive developers: unlike some others, if an issue is reported, there seems to be a fair chance of the developers engaging with the user and for the issue to be addressed in a subsequent update.
Increasing the size of the files in ArchiCAD to allow it to be used for more complex applications can be more comfortable and user-friendly.
Improving it to support more tutorials, add-ons, resources, and e-books.
Withholding releasing and developing new software and concentrating on improving the existing version can greatly help in the life of architecture and engineering.
I gave a rating of 10 because, thus far, Autodesk AEC Collection Seems to be on the leading edge for what is required for the construction planning, implementation, and continued of real-world assets. Autodesk has been a great benefit for our organization and has allowed us to continue to improve not only ourselves but the people we work with. We have been using Autodesk AEC Collection for a number of years and hope to continue for a long time coming.
The software has a significant learning curve. You also must know and understand construction standards and codes. Each member of our BIM team has spent 10+ years in construction and has had years of software training. The software also requires powerful computers to render the models. Without a BIM focused gpu and processor, the software will seem less usable when in reality, the computer is not capable of running the software properly
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.
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 different aspects of drawing and is easy to integrate with rendering software like Lumion 360 panorama.
Each of these pieces of software has a different use and focus. Some overlap with each other and some are components of Autodesk AEC Collection, such as Autodesk Fabrication CADmep. They are all well designed and powerful applications that help us with everything from planning to design and collaboration. We use all of them and will continue to explore other Autodesk products that may help our organization grow and accomplish more.
The low multi-year cost is a huge savings, compared to more popular competitors, the total cost of ownership is about 1/4 of an Autodesk design suite.
An effective training program can be implemented in under 40 hours/employee to reach intermediate level, as the intuitive interface is easy to teach. This appears to be significantly less, perhaps 1/3 of competing software.
The underdog element is still an obstacle, as converting ArchiCAD projects to Revit for our Consultants is a challenge. While ArchiCAD outputs perfectly good IFC (industry-standard BIM interchange format) files, Revit has yet to import them 100% correctly. Therefore, working with others takes a bit more overhead than when using Revit.
