« Q&A with Vectoworks | Main | After it launches next year, does SolidWorks V6 stand a chance? »

Jun 18, 2012


Nathan Ellery

Interesting Article, Ralph. Thanks for looking into it. For us ACA users who pay extra but can't use the service (it doesn't render aec objects!), it just seems another slap in the face but perhaps they want to work out the bugs for Autocad first. But what else is there in the latest version. Oh yes the intro says corner windows (didn't that come in on 12?).
I also think your comparison is off. Your render doesn't compare in quality with the online one (no sun & shadows) and also there is no way an online service is going to compete if your render only takes seconds at home with all the form filling out, uploading etc. But high end renders with lots of lights & reflections could see a return, not to mention the idea you can get on with your other work rather than tying up the machine.
The other issue I am concerned about is whether they will support RPC (Archvision) objects as part of the render.
But your main point is that Adesk need to get it together working smoothly and simply otherwise it's just another side show when they still can't fix old bugs in Acad/ACA.

Ralph Grabowski

I got a lot of response to my article on cloud rendering, some of it quite passioned. No surprise, there were two camps: those who see that cloud-based CAD work still has its challenges, and hasn't quite reached Dropbox-simplicity; and those who felt my review was unfair.

Of those in the unfair camp, all insisted that my 2.3MB test model was not challenging enough; many said I should have used a more complex model, specifically from Revit. Which makes me wonder....

... is Revit really slow at rendering?

... is cloud rendering not meant for AutoCAD users?

... how do users know where the cut-off is between models simple enough to be rendered faster on their desktop computer. and those complex enough to pay extra to have them rendered on the cloud?

I know that benchmarking is controversial, and so I clearly laid out ALL the specifications for the benchmarking I performed so that readers could take the results at face value. I look forward to others doing the same in the near future so that we can compare results.

Thank you for your input!

David Cohn

It wasn't just that your model wasn't challenging. Your method was flawed. The model you used had no lights or materials. Those are the elements that increase rendering time. Your test basically compared the time it takes to regenerate the model to the time it takes to upload the file to the cloud, process the request, regenerate the model, and send an email notifying you that it's ready. You basically compared how long it would take you to turn off the lights in your office if you were already there versus the time it would take you to call your wife from another room and ask her to go into your office and turn off the light and concluded that your wife is slower at turning off lights than you are.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


Search This Blog



Thank you for visiting!