Comparison
A CADMapper alternative built for analysis, iteration and export, not only data extraction.
Architects usually do not need another source of raw map lines. They need a faster way to move from location to a clean, styled, decision-ready site analysis. This page is written as a real comparison workflow: what to check, what to export and what to capture on screen when evaluating Gridded against CADMapper.
- generate the study area once, then keep iterating without paying for every visual tweak
- switch between 2D, 3D, sun study and export from the same project
- save presets for different client, competition or internal review views
Comparison hero: Gridded project next to a CAD-style export workflow
Use a clean side-by-side composition: left = styled Gridded context map, right = CAD export or layer setup panel.
Why people compare them
Where CADMapper is useful and where the workflow usually starts to break
CADMapper is often used as a fast route to linework. The problem starts one step later: when the architect still needs to restyle the output, compare several views, check massing context, produce a sun study or build client-facing diagrams without rebuilding the same base again.
- linework export is only the first half of the task
- visual iteration usually continues outside the original tool
- early-phase studies need context, not only extraction
What architects still do after export
Show a post-export workflow with notes like clean-up, recolor, compare layers, prepare board, rebuild shadow context.
What Gridded changes
Gridded treats the project as a reusable study area, not a one-off export
In Gridded the project starts with one fixed analysis area. From there the user can switch presets, edit visibility, add custom geometry, view the site in 3D, test sun and shadow and export different outputs without rebuilding the map. That makes it much closer to a real architecture workflow than a single extraction step.
- one project = one fixed study area
- multiple presets for the same site and the same source data
- DXF, SVG, PDF and GeoJSON exports from the same project state
Preset-based iteration inside one project
Use four cards or tabs: context preset, greenery preset, transport preset, sun study preset.
Workflow
How to evaluate Gridded as a CADMapper alternative in a real project
Use the same location in both tools. The point is not only to compare export fidelity, but to compare how much useful work still remains after the first output.
Generate the site once and name the project by address or client code
Create one fixed-area project around the site. This is the base for every later export, screenshot and preset.
Address search and area confirmation
Show address input, selected radius, frame and project naming before generate.
Build at least three presets before exporting anything
Create one clean context preset, one transport or access preset and one presentation preset with a calmer background and fewer layers.
Preset creation panel
Show style/layer changes and one clear CTA or pattern for saving a preset.
Switch to 3D and capture one context view with sun or shadow
This is where the comparison usually becomes clear. The architect can verify massing context and sun direction without leaving the same project.
3D context plus shadow study
Show a realistic 3D context crop with clear building silhouettes and visible shadow direction.
Export the final preset, not raw data only
The final deliverable should already look close to what you need on a board, in CAD or in an internal review deck.
Export modal with DXF and PDF options
Show export options and indicate that exports come from the currently selected preset.
Assets to prepare
What a good comparison package should include
If this page is used in SEO or paid acquisition, the screenshots should prove that Gridded is not only a data source. It is an iteration workflow.
- diagram-ready context map for boards and early client decks
- clean DXF or SVG base for CAD and Illustrator refinement
- one saved preset for each visual direction: context, transport, greenery, sun study
- clear screenshots of 2D, 3D and export settings for the next design review
Comparison
CADMapper vs Gridded: workflow-oriented comparison
This comparison intentionally focuses on what architects still need after the first export, because that is where most time is really spent.
| Criterion | Gridded | CADMapper |
|---|---|---|
| Primary job | Generate, iterate, save presets and export | Extract map data for downstream work |
| Project model | One reusable study area with multiple views | Often treated as a one-off export task |
| 3D + sun study | Available in the same project workflow | Usually handled elsewhere |
| Preset logic | Built around saved visual states for the same site | Mostly external restyling after export |
| Best use case | Architecture site analysis and diagram production | Initial linework acquisition |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gridded trying to replace every CAD or GIS tool?
No. It is strongest in the gap between raw location data and a presentable, export-ready site analysis workflow for architects.
What screenshots should this page eventually show?
A location search, an area confirmation step, a preset-based context workflow, one 3D sun or shadow view and one export modal. Those are the proof points that make the comparison credible.
Related pages