Ask ten studios what software they run and you will get ten different answers, but the shape is always the same: something to draw in, something to model in, something to make it look convincing, something to mark up, and something to keep the whole project moving. The tools inside each of those slots vary by practice, region and project type. The slots themselves barely change.
This is a map of those slots and the software that occupies them, written for someone setting up a studio toolkit or auditing one that grew by accident. It is not a ranked list, because the honest answer to "which is best" is almost always "the one your team and your consultants already use".
The five slots in an architecture toolkit
| Slot | What it's for | Common choices |
|---|---|---|
| Documentation / BIM | Construction documents, coordinated models, schedules | Revit, ArchiCAD, Vectorworks, AutoCAD |
| Conceptual modelling | Massing, early options, quick client-facing models | SketchUp, Rhino (+ Grasshopper), Blender |
| Visualisation | Renders, walkthroughs, competition imagery | Enscape, Lumion, Twinmotion, V-Ray |
| Markup & documents | Redlines, issued sets, specs, submittals | Bluebeam Revu, Adobe Acrobat |
| Running the work | Tasks, phases, hours, files, the team | Spreadbox and other project tools |
Studios rarely fill every slot with a separate product, and there is real overlap — Revit models can be rendered natively, Rhino can produce drawings. The slots are a way to spot a gap, not a shopping list.
Documentation and BIM: the core of the studio
This is the tool your deliverables come out of, which makes it the hardest to change and the one worth choosing most carefully. Revit dominates in a lot of markets, largely because consultants and contractors expect it, and coordination is far easier when everyone is in the same model format. ArchiCAD has a devoted following among practices that find it faster and more design-led for the same work. Vectorworks is common in smaller and landscape-adjacent practices.
AutoCAD has not gone anywhere. Renovation work, survey drawings, consultant files that arrive as DWG, and small projects where a full model is more overhead than it earns back all keep it in daily use. Treating BIM and CAD as an either-or is usually a mistake — most studios have both open in a given week.
Conceptual modelling: thinking, not documenting
Early design needs speed more than precision, and BIM tools are precise at the cost of speed. SketchUp earned its place because you can get a massing study in front of a client in an afternoon. Rhino is the answer when the geometry gets complicated — curved surfaces, freeform work, anything where the shape itself is the problem — and Grasshopper turns it into a parametric environment when a design has real variables to explore.
Visualisation: enough, not maximum
The biggest cost in visualisation is not the licence, it is the hours. Real-time engines like Enscape and Twinmotion plug straight into the model and produce something presentable in minutes, which is the right trade for most client meetings. Lumion and V-Ray go further when an image has to carry a competition entry or a marketing campaign. Studios that lose money on visualisation usually do it by using the competition-grade tool for the Tuesday client check-in.
Markup and documents: where the decisions live
Bluebeam Revu is close to a standard for a reason: it is built for construction documents rather than office paperwork, and its markup, comparison and takeoff tools match how a set actually gets reviewed. Whatever you use, the thing that matters is that a redline ends up attached to the work it belongs to. A markup that lives only in an email thread is a decision your studio will lose.
Running the work: the slot studios skip
Every practice invests in the first four slots, because you cannot produce a drawing without them. The fifth gets filled with whatever is lying around — a shared spreadsheet, a chat group, a folder structure and a lot of memory. That is where most missed deadlines actually come from. Not from drafting too slowly, but from a review nobody scheduled, a consultant file nobody chased, and a fee nobody was watching.
Generic tools can be bent into this slot, and plenty of studios have tried. They tend to fall out of use within a couple of months, because they model work as a flat list of tasks while architecture runs on phases, drawings and approvals.
Where Spreadbox fits
Spreadbox is the fifth slot, built for architecture studios: task boards with a team queue, project status across real phases, drawings and PDFs attached to the work, a calendar that syncs both ways with Google, team chat, per-task time tracking with a day clock, native iOS and Android apps, and Spreadie — an AI assistant that turns a spoken update into tasks and keeps the project memory. It does not replace Revit or SketchUp. It keeps the studio around them from falling apart.
Questions studios ask
What software do architects use most?
Most studios run a drafting or BIM tool as the core — Autodesk Revit, AutoCAD, ArchiCAD or Vectorworks — alongside a fast conceptual modeller such as SketchUp or Rhino. Around that sit a visualisation tool (Enscape, Lumion or Twinmotion), a PDF markup tool (usually Bluebeam Revu), Adobe's suite for boards and presentation, and something to run the projects and the team.
Do architects still use AutoCAD?
Yes, widely. BIM has taken over most new-build documentation, but AutoCAD remains common for 2D detailing, consultant drawings that arrive as DWG, renovation and survey work, and small projects where a full BIM model is more overhead than it is worth. Plenty of studios run both.
Is SketchUp or Rhino better for architects?
They solve different problems. SketchUp is faster to learn and hard to beat for early massing and quick client-facing models. Rhino handles complex geometry, curved and freeform surfaces, and — with Grasshopper — parametric work that SketchUp cannot do. Many studios use SketchUp for concept and Rhino when the form demands it.
What software do small architecture firms actually need?
A modelling and documentation tool, a way to mark up PDFs, cloud storage, and something to track projects, hours and the team. Small studios usually get more value from spending on the last of those than on a second visualisation package, because coordination — not drafting speed — is what most often costs them a deadline.
Auditing your own toolkit
Run the five slots against what your studio actually pays for. Two products fighting over the same slot is money you can redirect. An empty slot is a job someone is doing by hand, usually a principal, usually in the evening. In most practices the gap is not in the drawing tools — it is in the one that keeps everything else coordinated.