Autocad 2004 System requirements?

[Randox]

I've been hired by a construction company to build a system for running Autocad 2004 exclusively. When I looked at the minimum system requirements for the software, I thought they looked a little weak. If I remember correctly, 256 Mb RAM, 800 Mhz CPU, and 1024*768*32 video card. While I understand that these are MINIMUM requirements, I had expected to need quite a bit more horsepower. Can anyone tell me what their system specs are and how the software performs for them so that I can accurately gauge what I'll need to buy?

Thanks!
Randox

 

[CDH]

If you are running just AutoCAD, those are probably OK, but I would at least double the RAM, and maybe even the processor.

We are running ADT and my computer currently is a 2.4Ghz and 1.0G of RAM and a GeForce FX 5200 video card.

In my opinion, I would try to get the best machine you can get economically. You don't need the best machine out there, but you should get the best you can afford. If you have decent fast machine, it will save you money in the long run. (time spent opening drawings for example)

 

[lostsailor]

Randox,
I am running 2004 on my trusty Compaq Armada laptop which has a 897Mhz Pentium III, 512MB of RAM, and a RAGE P/M Mobility AGP 2x video card, not the fastest but definitely adequate for any tasks I have thrown at it. You should be able to do fine, specwise, with stuff that's readily available, on a retail level.
Regards,
Ron

 

[cfee]

RANDOX-
BOTH posts are right on, but definitely lean toward CDH's.
1. Get the best processor/motherboard combination you can possibly afford.
2. Get a MINIMUM of 1-G of RAM. No ifs-ands-or-buts. Don't even debate me on this point, guys!
3. MAKE CERTAIN that your video configuration does NOT use "shared RAM" (RAM shared from the motherboard).
4. Check here and other places for VIDEO COMPATIBILITY ISSUES. I hear ATI has done an admirable job reducung their ACAD compatibility issues. Post here for the current best recommendations concerning video. Its CRITICAL to your success.
5. LARGE FAST hard disk, and CURRENT O-S. WIN-2000 good, XP a bit better, XP-Pro prefered..., CD-Reader _&_ DVD R/W, etc.

BE SERIOUS about this purchase. 1. You'll have to live with it for YEARS (hopefully), and 2. YOU ARE GOING TO LOAD ADDITIONAL SOFTWARE (and ask your system to do additional jobs) over the next couple of years, that is going to compete with ACAD for system resources. Give them as much playing room as possible. It'll be nearly impossible to get the boss to approve your future upgrades, without explaining why you didn't take these issues into account from the beginning...

Good Luck!
C. Fee

 

[IFRs]

cfee is right on.

Max out on RAM and CPU speed.

Then try to match the drive and video card. Balance where you spend money here.

Buy as fast a drive as possible. If possible go for a RAID 0 with twin 15,000 RPM drives.

Buy the best video card you can.

 

[Randox]

Thanks for the information! I had been leaning towards the following configuration:

P4 3 GHz, 800 MHz FSB
2 gb PC4200 RAM
Twin 160 gig SATA hdds, Raid 0
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro
19" monitor with at tight dot pitch, around .23
Windows XP Pro

Are there any other components I need to pay special attention to? Input devices?


The company mentioned that their budget was $4,000. I think we can work with that...

 

[structuresguy]

Wowo, must be nice to have $4000!!!!

We recently went from ACAD 2002 to ADT 2004 & ABS 2004. My company spent a PILE on software, but completely ignored hardware. We were running P4-1700 MHz machines with 256 MB RAM with Win2000. Yes I said 256 MB!!

Well, needless to say, the machines were really slow with ADT/ABS. We complained bitterly and convinced them that hardware upgrade was required. We were soooooo happy when they graciously upgraded us all to 512 MB RAM. Nothing else. Wow, what a BIG difference that made. (If you can't tell, I am using my sarcastic typing now). Actually it did help, but we are still unbearably slow. And we have not even yet got into the 3D designing features of ADT/ABS. If we are slow with 2D, I can't wait to see how we perform in 3D. Right now, a simple 2D plan drawing, say 300 kB in ADT takes about 15-20 seconds to open from scratch (includes starting software). If the program is already running, takes about 10 seconds.

Those guys above who say to max out RAM, CPU and hard drive are bang on. I have a P4-3000 w/ 1 GB on dual channel PC4200 RAm at home and a fast MAxtor HD. I was trying the ADT demo at home, and it smokes my computer at work. At least 3 times faster opening. ANd I can actually spin a rendered 3D model without it dropping to wireframe.

I would say spend as much as you can on the hardware. It will pay for itslef in porductivity gains very quickly. And the lack of frustration in waiting on a slow computer brings unmeasureable psychologic rewards as well.

 

[CRG]

I have had problems with AutoCad’s ABS program when working with large files, (large binging 5 to 10 MB.) I had a 2.5 GHz processor, 1 GB of Ram, 128 MB AGP video card, and the system was still too slow when using ABS with large 3D files. I added a 15000 rpm SCSI hard drive and it makes the system acceptable for the large files. I am waiting until Windows and AuotCad can take advantage of a 64 bit processor before I upgrade my hardware.

I would recommend that you find out if the construction company plans on using any layer programs with large data bases. If so, consider a 15000 rpm SCSI hard drive. Buy the fastest machine that their budget will allow. If I were to make a purchase today, I would consider a dual processor machine. This may be overkill if the company is using ACAD without any layer programs.

 

[CWEngineer]

I am tried to build a pc to use AutoCAD and Architectural Desktop. This is what I plant to use on it:

AMD Athlon XP 2500 Barton (32 bit)
Either Asus A7N8X Deluxe or Abit NF7-s motherboards
1024MB Geil PC3200 RAM
PNY GeForce 4 MX 440 AGP 8X 64 MB DDR Verto 2D/3D Graphic Card
80 GB Maxtor Hard Drive

Do you guys think this is a reasonable system to use AutoCAD and Architectural Desktop?