CADopia Moves From IntelliCAD to ARES

I have been writing about the trouble brewing between the ITC and its former member CADopia.

Yesterday a tweet from Roopinder Tara of TenLinks alerted me to a press release issued by CADopia announcing the release of CADopia 11 based on Graebert technology. That makes CADopia the second company I know that has dumped the ITC in favor or the ARES CAD engine from Graebert, the first being SolidWorks. Actually, unlike SolidWorks, CADopia didn’t dump the ITC. Rather, it was kicked out of the organization.

I went ahead and downloaded a trial of CADopia Standard from and installed it. This is the new CADopia about box.

This was what the old CADopia about box looked like.

Click image for larger view

CADopia Standard is priced at $249 and can be extended by plug-ins. The Professional comes with full solid modeling capabilities, MS VSTA and the LightWorks rendering engine and sits at $495. I find this a bit odd because ARES Commander Edition from Graebert is priced at $995. So I am beginning to wonder why anyone would buy ARES Commander Edition when they are getting essentially the same thing for half the price.

ARES works on Windows, Mac and Linux. On November 30th 2010 CADopia released a Mac version and priced it at $995. I am expecting a Linux version soon.

I tried loading one of my ARES add-ins into CADopia 11 but it did not load. It looks like Graebert has a mechanism that prevents add-ins compiled for one ARES based application being loaded into another. Most probably I will need to recompile my ARES add-ins using the CADopia version of the SDK or simply change a signature. I am trying to figure this out with Graebert and CADopia and will share my findings here (if I am allowed to). Stay tuned.

  • Anonymous

    Hi Deelip,

    Have you tried open a big civil project on Cadopia ? I wonder about the performance. I tried DraftSight to open 9Mb civil project and the performance is poor.

  • Anonymous

    Usually the main problem for AutoCAD clone is poor performance when opening a big project. It will nice to have AutoCAD clone performance comparison like what you have done comparing 3D Modeling Software. What do you think Deelip ?

    • ARES, DraftSight and CADopia are one and the same thing. So when comparing you would need to test just one of them along with the others.

  • Anonymous

    Hmmm, three of them use the same engine : ARES. In 2D CAD, is the engine is the only factor to performance ? I mean in 3D software they usually have “graphic engine” so the performance one CAD system compare to other is different. In my opinion, DraftSight base on ARES engine is good enough to handle mechanical project. But will not suitable for civil or building project. Thats base on my experience.


  • Puzzled

    Deelip, you comments are inflammatory and I don’t understand why? What have you got against the ITC? Why do you flame them whenever you get a chance? What has the ITC done to you? Why would you NOT appreciate a small non-profit organization trying to take on the gorilla in the CAD world? Why wouldn’t you support that effort, which really is a gigantic task? Why do you say CADopia “dumped” the ITC when they were kicked out and sued for not paying their dues and were eventually sued (successfully) by the ITC? Solidworks is still a member of the ITC. Why do you say they “dumped” the ITC? How do you know what the plans are inside Solidworks? You not impressing very many people with this slamming of the ITC for no good reason.

    • I have nothing against the ITC. They may be a non-profit organization. But their members are most definitely for profit companies and make money by selling the software they pay to have developed by the ITC. In my opinion they don’t deserve special treatment. If the ITC was selling software themselves or giving it for free then maybe yes. to me the ITC is merely a development arm of a bunch of for profit companies.

      If you read my post carefully you will notice I said that SolidWorks dumped the ITC, while CADopia was kicked out.

      And yes, SolidWorks mostly definitely dumped the ITC. This is not my opinion. Rather this is from my conversations with SolidWorks executives. True, SolidWorks is till a member of the ITC. But thats only because they still need to maintain the legacy DWGeditor code.

  • PuzzledToo

    I am puzzled too. Why beat (slam) a dead horse ?

    • I don’t think the horse is dead. Rather I would say that is it a bit slow.

  • Peter

    As someone living in the UK it’s nice to see that the conversion from US$ to GB£ bears a close relationship to the conversion on
    Makes a nice change from some of the conversions that have been applied by other suppliers.

    Also, I see that the Professional version comes with VSTA. First time I’ve seen that.

  • Anonymous


    I did comparison by opening a 9Mb architecture project. below are the results of the test with a sequence starting from the best :

    1. ZWCAD
    2. ProgeCAD
    3. BricsCAD
    4. DraftSigth

    Pleaase not that I am not working with one of those software. I just did personal test to answer my curiosity…

  • CADG

    @hol, please share your hardware specs, OS versions of the products compared, and if possible the results of your comparison. i mean, is zwcad milliseconds or minutes faster?
    did you test only display features or did you perform operations like move, copy, etc. your dwg test file contains ACIS solids? hatchs, xref’s? 3d terrain?