I looked into FreeCAD a few times in the past (and wished it could reach the same attention as Blender)
But it is a bit like C4D/Blender vs Modo, add a random Cube at random position and correcting everything afterwards vs “drawing” a Cube at the right place and dimension. Which I prefer. Also I am a friend of “destructive” Modeling vs parametric Modeling by adding Modifiers or by Nodes.
And FreeCAD is basically a “Mechanical” CAD with a Modifier Stack, not so much a usual universal destructive Modeler CAD like Autocad and derivates, used by Architects.
So for a Wall you need a Line/Path first and then apply the Feature/Extrude (along Path) that make it a Wall. And if you want to change the Wall chains, you need to go down in Edit Mode and edit the Path. This somehow is quite counterproductive for my brain or modeling flow where I love to work with solid “boxes” and PushPull Tools.
On the other Hand I do love Parametric, just not for the small basics but for larger parts, like setting up Doors, Windows, Stories, Wall and Slab Styles, in BIM CADs like Vectorworks or Archicad.
Anyway, I will take look at FreeCAD 1.0 and hope it reaches soon a state as Blender reached now - before - all my last commercial CAD/BIM/3D Apps also made licensing finally unbearable.
But maybe then, those Tools and Workflows are already included in Blender (and Bonsai Extension).
I think functionally it got much better.
But for me it looks as it has a bit of a Blender 2.4 state still.
As how it works is not really how I would like, I put FreeCAD back again now for another few years but will keep an eye on it.
I think I could have gotten into FreeCAD if it had been available while I studied. As at that point I would not have already experienced a few other CAD/BIM Apps and their workflows and could be much more open.
I bought a FreeCad book. I did the same thing with Blender years ago. Then fought my way through every chapter :-D. My favorite program is TurboCad/ViaCad. A bit easier.
But you have to keep at it, otherwise it becomes difficult.
Now I’m just at a point where I’m thinking: Why can’t that work!!! Now I’ll have a look at the manual.
How does FreeCAD compare to the minimalistic workflow and UI of MoI 3D these days? I tried FreeCAD once, but I found the workflow convoluted and too technical for artistic projects, which is understandable of course, as CAD is aimed at a technical audience, but MoI established a great balance between technical capacity and artist-friendly control.
I don’t know Mol 3D yet. But FreeCad is clearly for technical illustrators . You have to design and pay attention to a few things, otherwise nothing will come of it.
If you really want to produce something, then FreeCad or another CAD program is better.
MOI3D is more targeted for freeform surface creation and is in essence a small Rhino clone.
Plasticity is becoming a serious competitor for MOI3D - and at one point also Rhino because Plasticity with the studio function can produce better surfaces and also has serious direct modeling capabilities.
FreeCAD is interesting as it is a mix of different packages.
You can model/draft in it like in AutCAD, but also work in it like in Revit using a BIM workflow. Further for parametric solid modeling it as a sufficient toolset. And also the surface modeling tools are not bad and follow a top down parametric workflow. Then add simulation assembly and CNC to it too.
But the problem is that the UIs in each mode is different, dialogs different which makes the work experience rather frustrating at times.
Today Fusion360 or Shapr3D offer a much better UI and workflow in the free version.
i’m sure by the time the m4 ultra arrives, the 50xx series will be out and the ultra will be lucky to make the first page.
but thats not to undercut what apple has achieved. within a few years they’ve managed to make gpus that are pretty much only topped by the best in class nvidia offerings.
and like stepping out of any sort of fandom bubble, having multiple competitive companies are a good thing for everyone in the long run. i’d love for intel and amd to keep making strides too. the ideal would be to have good options no matter which brand you land on, and each one can come up with unique innovations that push the others forwards too.
yes that is all nice but also 3D software devs have to catch up and start optimizing their tools for Metal framework. So far Windows versions are somehow getting more love it seems.
Blender seems to be an exception and is actually developed for Mac
for sure. i haven’t checked lately to see how well unreal’s latest lumen and nanite stuff is supported on macs. and its a perfect example of being the benchmark king vs just a solid day-to-day experience.
i care less as a creative about seeing 100+fps vs 50-60fps while i’m working (and i doubt anyone should be targeting explicitly 4090 hardware as a baseline when making stuff anyway). but having no access to a feature at all, or an editor that runs like a slug at 5fps is what will kill my productivity. thats the real hurdle apple needs to clear.
Works. Not ideal performance yet but they are working on bringing all the features and improving the performance on mac. SM6 is still “beta”
Performance ranges from half of 4070 down to 1/4 on M3pro. But you can get some actual work done and when you avoid unsupported features it’s pretty amazing seeing photorealistic realtime results on a macbook
oh i have slowdowns, but they’re mostly my own doing.
i guess i should clarify the key is making sure editors are responsive in ‘regular’ use - i can ALWAYS push things to the limit. but as long as I can isolate a particular element and work with reasonable responsiveness i’m happy.
Blockquote * Twinmotion is now packaged as a universal application, meaning it natively supports both Intel and Apple Silicon processors like the M1, M1 Pro, M1 Max, M2, and newer chips. The packaging for the architecture of both processors slightly increases the package size. Compiling for Apple Silicon ensures Twinmotion takes full advantage of its high performance and low power consumption.
Although …
Twinmotion can run on macOS versions earlier than 12.5 but it is not officially supported.
The Path tracer feature is not supported on macOS.
VR mode is not supported on macOS due to the hardware and driver limitations on Macs.
Lumen only supports software ray tracing mode on MacOS. This may impact visual quality. A computer matching the high-end requirements is recommended for best results.
Virtual Shadow Maps are currently not available for MacOS.
It is only the TM v2005 Preview so far.
(And was not yet available this morning - EDIT : OK, now it’s there !)
If VSM is a new UE 5.5 feature, it may take a bit of time until it is available in TM.
As I am currently learning Blender - and struggle everywhere …
I just wanted see if TM can meanwhile open/import IFCs (BTW no, nada)
and tumbled over TM release notes, which looked a bit strange to me.
Realized that is v2025 but I have still V2024.
So I accidentally discovered a Twinmotion Preview just shy before release
