The only thing we can agree on is that a was kinda harsh on Linus for advertising too much. I am a long time follower and he always talks great numbers about the forum.
I did say thank you to people who replies and I asked politely for thread locking. The forums that I follow use thread locking to avoid useless flame wars between fanboys (AMD vs. Intel, AMD vs. nVidia, etc.).
@Stephie_Girl
If you work in similar environment, I would appreciate your input ;)
@WoodenMarker
That topic doesn't help too much. I am trying to help out a friend. Not too sure about the budget. Will explain a little better later in the post.
@asusfan
I guess my preference is not important here. I am an Intel fan, but I don't know if those CAD apps are Piledriver buch-of-cores friendly. It is not about my preference, but CAD apps preference. If they do benefit from multicore CPU and work better with AMD, then AMD it is.
Not sure about the budget yet. I think no micro ATX. If maybe some expansion in needed one day... Since I think the budget will not allow high end components, I was thinkink no OC, no watercooling. Not sure about OS. My guess would be Win8.
xx-Grim-One-xx and ShadowRaven gave their opinions. The only problem is that they are opposing ones.
Since I don't have a budget (need to make a few options at a few price points) so I needed general information about those programs.
First thing I did is I looked for benchmarks at Anandtech, but I didn't find CAD related tests.
I would say that no matter the price range, the same generation cards should work similarly. Either Cuda works better or AMD raw power is better. Or the apps are balanced for both. Quadro is out of reach, I think. 7970 or GTX 770 would be as good as it gets.