I've made the decision that I need a dedicated CAD machine at the office. I will need to run AutoCAD, and will be using it basically just to markup or work with files that other people have created, so I don't expect any complex 3D work or anything too crazy.

I have a Lenovo 3000 K100 with a 2.33 GHz Core2 Duo and 2GB DDR2 and integrated graphics. I am trying to decide if I want to throw some ram in this and get a graphics card or buy something new. I'm not looking to spend a fortune because it will only see limited CAD work.

Any input would be appreciated.

5/17/2011 1:38:10 PM

Also, the only cards that AutoCAD recommends are workstation cards, are any of the consumer level cards compatible?

And this will mainly be 2D linework stuff

[Edited on May 17, 2011 at 2:40 PM. Reason : .]

5/17/2011 2:31:12 PM

I don't use AutoCAD but my experience with 3D programs (Solidworks/Maya/Blender3d) it usually comes down to graphics cards and RAM usage. Rendering took some benefit from extra processing power, but I can't remember it ever making a difference in editing or viewing.

If it was my money I'd max out the RAM and add in the most expensive quaddro/CUDA board I could afford. Check NewEgg - they had a quaddro board on sale last week that I should have pulled the trigger on for my backup machine for around $125.


Edit: NVidia has blurred the lines in their CUDA architecture. All the cards supporting CUDA are sharing that same "workstation" class board. But the quaddro's are still reigning supreme. A lot of 3D programs are using openGL for quick render previews and you'll notice an incredible uptick in the number of points and fluidity of the program over that onboard. Even a $40 card from freaking Matrix would give you a huge improvement.

[Edited on May 17, 2011 at 2:36 PM. Reason : Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 3100 ]

5/17/2011 2:32:30 PM

Isnt the minimum AutoCAD spec now at dual core with 2Gb with a preference for quads and >6Gb? I might get a whole new system if this is for everyday use.

I use Microstation at work and I assume AutoCAD will be similar. For 2D linework we cant tell a difference between a Geforce GTX460 and a Quadro fx4600. Now 3D is another story. If rendering a surface on the fly with dynamic lighting while rotating, a Quadro is the only way to go. If 3D linework is more what you do then I would lean toward the Geforce with cost weighing out over the small performance increase.

5/17/2011 4:05:17 PM

its not for everyday use, just occasional if someone sends me something and i need to move a couple things and send back

5/17/2011 4:26:21 PM

so i think i'm gonna go 2x2GB ram, throw one of these in it http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133274&cm_re=quadro-_-14-133-274-_-Product and a couple 20" monitors and call it a day

5/17/2011 9:00:56 PM

^that's OpenGL 3.0, at least go with the 600 w/ 4.0:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133354

[Edited on May 17, 2011 at 9:53 PM. Reason : .]

5/17/2011 9:53:36 PM

are most monitors now DVI? don't want to run into any problems with the HDMI port on that.

5/17/2011 9:56:18 PM

It's a DisplayPort, not HDMI, and it comes with a DisplayPort to DVI adapter so you can run 2x DVI

5/17/2011 9:59:44 PM

ah, gotcha. looks like i'll go with that one then.

5/18/2011 10:04:53 AM

I'm running solidworks on my dual core Amd e350 2gb netbook.

Unless you're going to work with complex assemblies, don't even think about buying an expensive workstation video card. Get yourself something mid range and double your RAM.

You people seriously overestimate his needs from the sounds of it.

5/18/2011 11:23:55 PM

or i just want to buy some cool shit!

i just went with a basic card and doubled the ram. also got a couple monitors because the old ass CRT needed to go.

the only change is that i think i may just go with AutoCAD LT, it probably covers everything I need for a fraction of the cost.

5/19/2011 11:07:31 AM