ARCHICAD is a 3D architectural design application and BIM from Graphisoft, a Nemetschek Group company headquartered in Budapest.
$240
per month
SOLIDWORKS
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
Dassault Systemes offers SOLIDWORKS, a computer-aided design (CAD) system for education and manufacturing supporting 2D or 3D design, electrical design, simulations, and product development with collaboration tools.
$1,295
per year
Pricing
ARCHICAD
SOLIDWORKS
Editions & Modules
Archicad Solo Version
$240
per month
Archicad Full Version
$280
per month
Solidworks Annual Subscription
1,295
per year
Solidworks Standard
3,996
per standalone license
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ARCHICAD
SOLIDWORKS
Free Trial
Yes
No
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
SOLIDWORKS
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 …
SOLIDWORKS is actually used by major corporations to design and create products for wide release, whereas AutoDesk Inventor is usually only seen as an instructional tool to teach students the basics of 3d modeling so that they can adapt to more complex software with less effort …
Creo is basically focusing on pure solid 3D modeling, while on the other hand the SOLIDWORKS' modeling approach is more parametric type and it is suiting for my purpose of use. Easy to use interface of SOLIDWORKS as compared to Creo. Features are easy to use. Just one click …
SOLIDWORKS is the best suited for the beginners,as it provides the simplest interface and simulation procedure. With SOLIDWORKS every simulation can be done easily and no professional training is required. SOLIDWORKS also has a drawing tab, which we can use to make General …
SOLIDWORKS is easier to use with just enough useful features to work with, the designing process is fluid like regular flow of design thinking. The other two software are very similar to SOLIDWORKS, Inventor and Solid Edge are more advanced in certain areas of application, …
Our team in China uses Siemens NX for the same reason our U.S. counterparts use SOLIDWORKS. Siemens provides similar features as SOLIDWORKS from the 3D CAD usage and Injection Molding Analysis.
Onshape is a direct competitor. It has great entry level pricing and it is easy to access with no installation required. Being a web based app there is sometime some lag being based in NZ. Management also have concerns over where the data is stored on the cloud. With SW we can …
We have chosen SOLIDWORKS for its diffusion (many of our partners use it), for its ease of use, for its great experience in the development of sheet metal, and for its excellent after-sales service.
SOLIDWORKS is way less complicated and easier to use, overall if you have had any computer training anyone can easily sit down and be trained within a minimal time to be able to use it efficiently and effectively. One of my employees went so far as to teach his 10-year-old …
We use both actually. SW is great for 3D, but given we do not design products, just tooling/processing to make products, we use SW to convert 3D into 2D then do all the work in DraftSight.
I have not used alternatives to SOLIDWORKS. I've used SOLIDWORKS for the past 7 years as it was the standard in my past job. It has many more capabilities than 2D software and is a staple of our engineering department. I plan to continue to use SOLIDWORKS for many years to …
Draftsight is the 2-d equivalent of SOLIDWORKS. Its main competitor is AutoCad by Autodesk, however I find Draftsight to be more user friendly. AutoDesk also makes Inventor, a 3-d software more similar to SOLIDWORKS however my experience with it was only limited to high …
SOLIDWORKS is simple to use and new users become proficient in a short amount of time. Operation is intuitive and with the aid of the built-in tutorials, most of the skills required for day-to-day use become second nature. The ability to collaborate and communicate ideas to …
In many scenarios, SolidWorks and Inventor actually compare fairly evenly to each other. However, I believe that where SolidWorks really stands out is the fact that it was designed from the start as a 3D parametric solid modeling application whereas Inventor comes from a …
I have previously worked with AutoDesk Inventor for designing very complex door mechanisms and large assemblies of drilling machines. I did not face any stability or performance issues
I only used Inventor for the 30-day free trial, which admittedly is not enough time to really give it a fair shot, especially since I had almost no 3D drawing experience before I used Inventor. There were two main things that pushed us toward SOLIDWORKS. First was the support …
SOLIDWORKS provides not only aesthetic appearance of a product but also provides the capability to analyze behavior of structural and material components.
AutoCAD, in many ways, still looks and feels like you are designing something in the 1980's. It definitely caters more to the generation of people who are used to drafting. SOLIDWORKS is much more visually appealing, which counts for a lot when you will have lots of engineers …
Creo offers easier design for surface modeling. Inventor is simpler to use, however, it is much more limited in modeling. Overall, I find SOLIDWORKS has a good balance of simplicity and completeness at the same time.
I chose SOLIDWORKS after trying a few open-source solutions. They were great, however sometimes lacked in a few vital areas, in a way that a commercial, well-funded product shouldn't. Given my previous familiarity and confidence with SOLIDWORKS, I didn't bother looking any …
Originally my company was using Onshape for CAD but many of our engineers were not familiar with the program and found it more difficult and less intuitive to use. SOLIDWORKS PDM vault works well so the cloud-based aspect of Onshape wasn't that unique.
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
As a mechanical engineer, it is one of the best tools to just start modeling and engineering with. The UI tools are intuitive and engineering analysis such Mold Analysis, FEA, are great! Other 3D CAD modeling tools have a longer learning curve to master. All in all, if you're not planning to design an entire airplane with large assembly files, then Solidworks is your tool!
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.
The collaborative work environment is a cool and useful feature where groups of people can work on the same model at the same time, and SOLIDWORKS ensures that you don't overwrite each other's work.
The ease and amount of customization options are very useful for creating a personalized and intuitive user interface, whether SOLIDWORKS is your native CAD package or not.
It is very easy to quickly edit a model you have already created. The software allows sketch and feature editing without having to take the time to actually enter the sketch/feature environment.
The use of configurations and configurations-specific dimensions in the same sketch is very useful for creating different forms of the same part
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.
To date, the baked in surfacing tools lack power compared to dedicated surfacing software.
In a similar vein, the core modeling kernel is not owned by SOLIDWORKS themselves and so there exists limitations with regards to implementing certain modeling/math.
SOLIDWORKS is playing catchup to other online vendors of CAD (notable OnShape); instead of being the once leader, they are being forced to compare themselves. This, however, may work to their advantage and in turn allow them to produce a better on-line CAD tool.
I have been using SOLIDWORKS for around 12 years as of writing this review, so have learned where most things are and how they work. When first starting out it was quite daunting, but the interface is well laid out with like functions near each other which made finding new functions relatively easy.
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.
We have an unusual arrangement. We don’t pay for support, but we’re partnered with a VAR for second-tier support.
I work with other users if I have questions but when we’ve had to ask the VAR, they always have answers. It appears that all of the VARs have access to a support platform from DS SOLIDWORKS that helps them answer most questions.
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.
Onshape is a direct competitor. It has great entry level pricing and it is easy to access with no installation required. Being a web based app there is sometime some lag being based in NZ. Management also have concerns over where the data is stored on the cloud. With SW we can control where it is stored
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.
Hard to answer directly. Given our customer's needs, we absolutely have to have SW to open their file types.
Given the relatively limited use we need at our company, it would be useful to have a cheaper option that was more stripped down but still had some capabilities. Something in-between SW and eDrawings, for example. SW is very capable and expensive, eDrawings is free and super limited. Would be nice to have a middle option.
