AutoCAD vs. Max

[MikeScott]

I know Max is designed to render, and CAD sort of does it as an afterthought.. But speedwise, which could I expect to finish a render first?

 

Same render, same lights.. created in CAD, imported into Max.

 

I'm having rendering speed issues, and the suggestion has come up that perhaps Max might solve the speed issue. The CAD render quality is fine, but the render speed is killing me, and it looks as though the demand for renderings is climbing very quickly, so I've been asked to investigate other options in order to keep up.

 

I'm well versed in AutoCAD, and would prefer to model there if only because I have about 1000 different rendering drawing files that are ready to be modified for new renders, rather than starting from scratch. Plus, it eliminates the need for a learning curve.

 

Any assistance or insight would be appreciated.

[Cad64]

Well actually, the program itself has nothing to do with the rendering, whether it's Autocad or Max. The rendering engine is what deals with that, and both programs use Mental Ray as their rendering engine. Rendering is easier in Max because you have many more options as far as materials, lighting, shadows and rendering options in general.

 

If you are experiencing speed issues, it's probably your computer. I see you have only 2GB RAM, at least I think that's what you have? Your computer details show that as 2046MB, but I assume that's a misprint? And your processor is a duo core. I am also assuming you're running a 32 bit operating system?

 

My recommendation would be to upgrade to a 64 bit OS, quad core or core i7 processor and a minimum of 8GB RAM. This should cut your render times in half at least.

 

Ah, wait a minute, I just noticed you're using Autocad 2004? You really need to upgrade your software. There have been vast improvements to the rendering system in newer versions of Autocad. So, upgrade your system and upgrade your software and you will see dramatic improvements in your render times.

[MikeScott]

Thanks. The 2046mb is what the system spec shows, I thought that was weird too, but figured there was a reason behind listing it that way? (I'm not real savy in that regard)

 

I just upgraded to this hardware, so they aren't likely to go for changing that.. However, an AutoCAD upgrade is likely the obvious answer I've been overlooking here. I know it's not using half the hardware I've got in this thing.. Supposedly it multithreads during renders, but my system usage tells a much different story.

 

What's a good AutoCad release to shoot for in terms of using this current hardware setup? I'd like to go for 2010 but it seems like I'd need to upgrade the hardware first to get agressively timed renders.

 

I might be able to justify a RAM upgrade if I can provide specs showing it'd use the extra RAM if I had it, but I suspect that's about it hardware-wise.

 

Thanks again!

[Cad64]

You might want to take a look at these threads also:

http://www.cadtutor.net/forum/showthread.php?t=45232

http://www.cadtutor.net/forum/showthread.php?t=39876

[Cad64]

Yeah I must've still been half asleep when I posted previously. 2046MB is 2GB. Need some coffee.

 

RAM is cheap. You could throw an extra 1GB in your machine for about $50. You will have to enable the 3GB switch in your boot.ini file though. http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEmem.mspx

 

Any version of Autocad 2007 and higher will be a significant upgrade.

[MikeScott]

ooh.. thanks for the tip on the 3gb switch.. never heard of that before.

 

Point taken on the autocad upgrade, and those other links were definately informative.