which new intel proceesor is enough to run autoCAD 2009?

[jsanford]

I want to buiy a new computer and most basic dell models seems to offer enough of what's needed to run AutoCAD 2009. However the new 2010 intel processors (intel core i3 - 350M 2.26Gh (4 Threads, 3M Cache, i5 etc), don't match the processors listed under system requirements. Does anyone know which of the new processors would be best to run 2009? Other thoughts on specs listed below?

Other cpu specs:

Windows 7 - 64 bit

3GB ram, shared dual channel ddr3

320 GB hard drive

Intel HD graphics video card

Thanks!!!

[ReMark]

Thoughts? Yes. Add more RAM. Depending on the number of slots on your motherboard I'd recommend 6 or 8GB and not the 3GB you show.

 

Is that Intel video card really a dedicated graphics card or a graphics chip (hard-wired to the motherboard)?

[ReMark]

Re: Core-i3.

 

The Core i3-540 is a dual core CPU with a max speed of 3.06GHz. And yes, it will run AutoCAD 2009.

[JD Mather]

Since 2009 is a 32-bit app you will need Windows 7 Professional (or whatever they call it) to install in compatibility mode.

Question - if you have Civil 3D 2010 as indicated in your profile, why do you need AutoCAD 2009?

[ReMark]

Windows 7 Professional, Enterprise or Ultimate. Just depends on how much $$$ you have lying around.

[jsanford]

ReMark - integrated chip -though it could be upgraded to a dedicated card.

JD - laptop is for a friend, student -

thanks for your help guys - sounds like the $ should be in the RAM and OS!

[JD Mather]

JD - laptop is for a friend, student -

 

Students do not have to learn on ancient release. All students can download the latest release of AutoCAD for free from http://www.autodesk.com/edcommunity

 

Windows 7 Home works fine. Spend the money on RAM. I would also get a 17" screen for CAD work with numerical keypad. For another $59 pick up a 3DConnexion SpaceNavigator.

[jsanford]

great - thanks JD!!

[dude]

I would think any Core2Duo and above would run AC fine. I run 16 GB of ram but I do virtualize win xp on my Mac and draw in LT with no problems.

[ReMark]

I always recommend as a minimum that a serious CAD user go with MS Windows Professional and not the Home Edition. I think you'll find it to be a more stable platform.

[JD Mather]

I am running on Home at home.

[ReMark]

I'm running on empty.

 

My preference for Pro or Ultimate may date back to the time when "the kernel" the OS was based on was different than the Home Edition version and considered more stable when it came to software glitches.

[Longchamp]

Don't waste your money on 6GB of RAM if you don't feel like it. It offers next to no performance upgrade compared to 3GB

 

Observe: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/memory-module-upgrade,2264-4.html

[BlackBox]

I use AutoCAD Civil 3D Land Desktop Companion 2009 (longest name ever!) daily, and here are my specs:

• Intel Core 2 6300 @ 1.86 Ghz
  
• 2.00 GB RAM
  
• Win XP Pro, 32 Bit
  

We're getting new PC's later this year for Civil 3D 2011, not exact on the specs, as they are still forthcoming:

• Dual-Intel i series (3, 5, 7?) Quad Core 3.06+ Ghz
  
• 6-8 GB RAM
  
• Windows 7 Pro, 64 Bit
  

[BlackBox]

Don't waste your money on 6GB of RAM if you don't feel like it. It offers next to no performance upgrade compared to 3GB

 

Observe: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/memory-module-upgrade,2264-4.html

 

 

Yes... Converting small Audio and Video files (home related tasks?), are *very* different from that of professional production, my friend.

 

I believe this may help explain why, on such remedial tasks, the performance comparison is mute:

 

64 Bit and AutoCAD?

 

Performance is not really a comparison differentiation point unless of course you have been using HUGE files where it has been swapping to disk. Some performance gains may be realized simply because many 64 bit machines have a faster bus, memory, and I/O than most of the 32 bit machines that most have.

 

Tasks such as volumes calculations, modeling 100's of thousands of points, etc. benefit (they do not require) from having the additional RAM. Even Win XP has a 3GB switch, that can enable Win OS to dedicate up to 3GB of RAM to a single application.

[Longchamp]

There are multiple pages in that article with various benchmarks, including games which have plenty of 3D modeling and physics going on.

 

And regardless of whether or not the situation is exactly the same, these benchmarks still provide a general performance metric.

 

If you're working with files using gigabytes of RAM, of course you're going to see a more substantial increase but instances of AutoCAD using more than 1GB of memory seem to be pretty uncommon

[ReMark]

If you are going to be doing any complex 3D drawings then get the additional RAM as it will be beneficial.

[BlackBox]

There are multiple pages in that article with various benchmarks, including games which have plenty of 3D modeling and physics going on.

 

 

If I have incorrectly dismissed the source you provided, then I apologize. I must have overlooked the additional pages in my haste (as I am at work). I simply meant to suggest that for graphic, and computing intensive applications, having more RAM does positively impact the computing environment, it is just not necessary.

 

I can only speak from personal experience, as a user of both AutoCAD Verticals, Maya, Final Cut Pro, etc.

 

And regardless of whether or not the situation is exactly the same, these benchmarks still provide a general performance metric.

 

If you're working with files using gigabytes of RAM, of course you're going to see a more substantial increase but instances of AutoCAD using more than 1GB of memory seem to be pretty uncommon

 

 

I agree; generalizations are invaluable in daily life. Thanks for the kind reminder, my friend.

[BlackBox]

:: Unrelated ::

 

Has anyone else just got an email blast for all their subscribed threads at the same time (even ones from earlier this morning)?