AI for CAD Tools
Generative engineering software compared on 5 criteria: where studies solve, which constraints they accept and how results return to CAD and PDM.
·
⏱
6 min read
Dr. Maor Farid
Maor Farid is the Co-Founder and CEO of Leo AI, the first AI platform purpose-built for mechanical engineers. He holds a PhD in Mechanical Engineering and completed postdoctoral research at MIT as a Fulbright fellow. A Forbes 30 Under 30 honoree and former AI researcher and Mechanical Engineer in an elite military intelligence, Maor leads Leo AI's mission to transform how engineering teams design better products faster.
BOTTOM LINE
Pick generative engineering software by where the study is set up, where it solves and what geometry returns to your CAD. Trial two or three platforms on three released parts that have a known mass and a validated stress report. Leo covers the work around the study: finding earlier parts and checking hand calculations from your PDM or PLM.
Choose generative engineering software by three things: where the study is set up, where it solves, and what geometry comes back into your CAD. Fusion, Creo and the Siemens tools set up the study inside an environment your team may already license, while nTop builds geometry from rules instead.
If you manage a team that stores parts in PDM or PLM, use the five criteria below. They narrow five platforms to two or three worth a trial.
Five criteria decide which generative platform fits a team
A single engineer judges the shapes in a demo. A team also lives with where the study is defined, who can rerun it and what happens to the result afterwards. Score each platform on these five criteria.
Where the study is set up. In Creo, the Generative Design tab opens inside the part or assembly and creates a structural study by default. In nTop, you encode design logic as parameters and algorithms, so the setup is closer to a program than a CAD feature.
Where it solves. Fusion generates designs with a single cloud solve. Creo runs Optimize on the study and offers Send to Cloud when you want multiple designs. A cloud solve sends study geometry off your network, so IT needs to approve it before the trial.
Which constraints the study accepts. Creo studies take design spaces, loads, boundary conditions, multiple load cases, and manufacturing and geometric constraints. Siemens lists permissible loads, target weight, materials and manufacturing methods as inputs. Creo does not support family tables in Generative Design, which matters if your library uses them.
What geometry comes back. Fusion returns editable design solutions and Creo saves a Generative Design feature to a part. Simcenter Inspire combines BRep, PolyNURBS, facets and implicit geometry. nTop stores geometry as signed distance fields, and its course lists a lesson on converting and exporting to a mesh or CAD body.
Who can run it, and at what cost per study. Fusion needs a commercial subscription, trial, start-up or educational entitlement. Studies use tokens unless you hold the Fusion Simulation Extension, which allows numerous studies without limits.
IN PRACTICE
The geometry search has been invaluable, helping me find standard parts instead of designing new ones, saving a huge amount of time and effort. The search system is smart and CAD-aware.
- eytan s., R&D Engineer
What each platform's documentation says it does
The table uses only what each vendor page states, read on 2026-11-08. Cells say Not stated where the page is silent, so ask the vendor about those cells during the trial.
Platform | What it does | Where it solves | Data it reaches | Team features | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fusion Generative Design | Multi-objective study that returns several editable designs | Single cloud solve | A model edited in the Fusion workspace | Tokens per study, or no study limit with the Simulation Extension | Teams already on Fusion |
Creo Generative Design | Topology optimization study that creates a Generative Design feature | Optimize in Creo, or Send to Cloud | Part or assembly open in Creo | Several load cases per study; no family tables | Creo teams |
Siemens NX | Generative design with topology optimization on facet and B-rep data | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated | NX teams |
Simcenter Inspire | Designer-facing CAE with generative design and manufacturability checks | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated | Teams that want simulation next to modeling |
nTop | Geometry built from parameters and algorithms in a notebook | Not stated | Not stated | Command-line lessons (nTop Automate) in the docs | Teams with someone who writes design logic |
Leo | Finds and reuses parts, answers with cited sources, runs engineering calculations | Desktop and web app | CAD and PLM data you grant access to, including Windchill, Teamcenter, SolidWorks PDM and Vault | You choose which folders, projects or teams it can access | Knowledge work around a study |
Siemens now lists Simcenter Inspire among the former Altair products that joined the Simcenter family in June 2026, so older Altair Inspire material may use the previous name.
Each criterion points to a different type of team
Setup location. Teams that release parts from Creo keep one environment when the study opens in the part itself. The Creo GDX walkthrough covers the study steps. Teams with a computational designer suit nTop, where the notebook works like source code for the design.
Solve location. Fusion documents a cloud solve and Creo documents an optional one. The Siemens, Inspire and nTop pages read for this post state no solve location. Ask each of the 3 vendors where study geometry is processed and stored, and record the answers.
Constraints. A casting or machining team should test its own process rule first. Creo accepts manufacturing and geometric constraints in the design criteria. For the Siemens side, see generative design in NX.
Returned geometry. The release CAD decides this. Open every result in the system that owns your drawings and count the clean-up steps. For the underlying methods, read topology optimization versus generative design.
Cost per study. Count how many studies the team runs in a month. Token billing and a no-limit extension meter the same work differently, and the other 4 vendors state no price on the pages cited here, so request quotes.
Run a two-week trial on three parts you already know
Use released parts with a known mass and a validated stress report, so every result has a baseline.
Pick 3 released parts: a machined bracket, a cast housing and a printed part. Keep the baseline mass and the validated FEA report for each.
Write one study brief per part: envelope, load cases, material, process constraint and target safety factor. Give each tool the same brief.
Time the setup. Pass: a second engineer rebuilds the study from the brief alone in under 2 hours.
Ask each vendor where the study geometry is processed. Pass: a written answer before any production file is used.
Open each result in your release CAD. Pass: editable geometry, or a documented conversion step of under 1 hour per part.
Check each result in your validated solver at the same loads. Pass: peak stress at or below allowable, and mass at or below the baseline.
The worked example below uses example inputs. Replace them with your own.
Quantity | Calculation | Result |
|---|---|---|
Baseline mass | Released bracket | 1.20 kg |
Candidate mass | Generative result | 0.84 kg |
Mass reduction | (1.20 - 0.84) / 1.20 | 30.0 % |
Allowable stress | 275 MPa yield / 1.5 safety factor | 183.3 MPa |
Peak stress in your solver | Validated run | 171 MPa |
Stress margin | 183.3 / 171 - 1 | 7.2 % |
This candidate passes on both counts. A 30 % mass drop with a peak stress above 183.3 MPa is a failed study, whatever the shape looks like. Choosing topology optimization software compares the solver side separately.
Leo checks the study brief against your design history
Leo covers the step before the first study: finding out whether your team has already solved this part. You give Leo the study brief, for example a bracket envelope of 120 x 60 x 40 mm and a 2 kN load, and point it at the PDM or PLM folders it may read.
Leo returns earlier brackets with similar geometry from the vault, using geometric search. It also returns the material values behind your assumptions with sources you can open, and a calculation document for the hand check.
One limit: Leo runs no FEA or CFD solves of its own, so the topology solve and the stress check stay in your generative and simulation tools. When results show that a simulation is still due, Leo says so. IT can review data handling on the security page.
FAQ
Generative Design overview, Autodesk Fusion Help, Autodesk, accessed 2026-11-08
Generative Design Workflow, Creo Help (R13), PTC, accessed 2026-11-08
Generative design, Siemens, accessed 2026-11-08
Simcenter Inspire software, Siemens, accessed 2026-11-08
How does nTop work?, nTop Docs, nTop, accessed 2026-11-08
See Leo on your team's own data
A 30-minute walkthrough on your PDM or PLM data, with deployment covered.
Book 30 minutes to watch Leo search your own vault for earlier parts and answer from cited sources, and to ask how deployment and file access work for your team.
#1 New AI Software Globally - G2 2026
Enterprise-grade security
Trusted by world-class engineering teams
