# Teamcenter vs Aras Innovator for a manufacturer needing strong CAD integration and revision control: which is worth the implementation investment?

<p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">For PLM and engineering data reviewers on G2 :I'm weighing<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/teamcenter/reviews"> </a><a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/teamcenter/reviews"><strong>Siemens Teamcenter</strong></a> against<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/aras-innovator/reviews"> </a><a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/aras-innovator/reviews"><strong>Aras Innovator</strong></a> for a manufacturing firm that needs strong CAD integration and tight revision control. Both sit in the<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/categories/engineering-document-management"> </a><a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/categories/engineering-document-management">engineering document management</a> category, and from what I can tell they share plenty: multi-CAD data management, structured revision and engineering change processes, and an implementation that is a real project, not an install.</p><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Where I see each pulling ahead:</p><ul>
<li>
<strong>Teamcenter</strong> has the deeper out-of-the-box CAD story: native NX integration plus mature connectors for SolidWorks, CATIA, Creo and Inventor, with revisions and change impact handled from inside the CAD tool. </li>
<li>
<strong>Aras Innovator</strong> is the open, low-code bet: the platform bends around your processes, subscription covers upgrades, and CAD connectors exist for the majors. </li>
</ul><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Which one do you think earns its implementation cost, and why? Also, is there a third option I should consider?</p><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true"></p><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true"></p>

##### Post Metadata
- Posted at: 28 days ago
- Author title: Tech Consultant
- Net upvotes: 1


## Comments
### Comment 1

&lt;p&gt;From G2 reviews, Teamcenter earns its implementation cost when CAD integration depth is the primary requirement. G2 reviewers in NX and multi-CAD environments consistently describe it as the tool where revision control actually lives inside the CAD workflow rather than alongside it, though they&#39;re equally consistent that the implementation is heavy and SI-dependent. Aras gets the nod when process flexibility and long-term upgrade cost matter more than out-of-the-box CAD depth, with PTC Windchill as the third option reviewers raise most often for manufacturers already on Creo who want Teamcenter-level CAD integration without the Siemens ecosystem commitment.&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 26 days ago
- Author title: Marketing Executive




## Related Product
[Teamcenter](https://www.g2.com/products/teamcenter/reviews)

## Related Category
[Product Lifecycle Management (PLM)](https://www.g2.com/categories/product-lifecycle-management-plm)

## Related discussions
- [How well does Trello scale into a larger team?](https://www.g2.com/discussions/1-how-well-does-trello-scale-into-a-larger-team)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 6
- [Can we please add a new section](https://www.g2.com/discussions/2-can-we-please-add-a-new-section)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 0
- [Quantifiable benefits from implementing your CRM](https://www.g2.com/discussions/quantifiable-benefits-from-implementing-your-crm)
  - Posted at: about 13 years ago
  - Comments: 4