PVFARM and PVX both promise better grading outcomes for utility-scale solar. Both cite real project data. Both position terrain analysis as a core differentiator. That is where the similarities end.
The fundamental difference is architecture. PVFARM is a cloud platform. PVX is an AutoCAD extension. That single fact shapes every downstream tradeoff: where your data lives, how your team collaborates, what outputs you can hand to construction, and how deeply terrain analysis integrates into your existing workflow.
This comparison lays out both tools honestly so you can decide which architecture fits your engineering process.
Quick comparison
| PVFARM | PVX | |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | Cloud (browser) | AutoCAD extension |
| Detailed engineering | Browser-based layout and analysis | Full CAD control over every pile, cable, and grading contour |
| Construction output | Cloud exports | Native DWG/DXF, CSV/XLS schedules |
| Earthwork savings | No published project data | $727K saved, 70% less volume |
| Cable optimization | Automatic routing (Trunk Bus/Harness) | 3 topologies, per-string voltage drop ($430K saved) |
| Your data | Lives on their servers | Never leaves your machine |
Browser-based tools work for preliminary layout and screening. Detailed design, the kind that goes to construction, happens in CAD. Your civil team works in AutoCAD. Your IFC packages are DWG files. That is where PVX lives.
Request a Demo + 2-Week Free Trial →The architectural split
PVFARM runs entirely in a browser. You upload terrain data, run layouts and grading in its cloud engine, and export results. This removes local installation and compute requirements.
PVX runs inside AutoCAD. You work on your actual topo surface in the same environment where your civil and electrical drawings already live. PVX.Cad keeps the core design workflow local. Data leaves the workstation only when you explicitly publish a project to PVX.View or submit it to PVX.Assess as a cloud job.
Neither architecture is inherently better. But they have very different implications for engineering teams doing detailed design work on complex terrain.
What PVFARM covers
PVFARM’s published capabilities include:
- Speed to first layout. Upload terrain, generate a layout, and review preliminary grading volumes for early-stage screening.
- Accessibility. No AutoCAD license required. No local compute dependency. Any team member with a browser can access the project.
- Grading optimization. PVFARM’s marketing pairs an NREL benchmark (civil work and grading run 15-20% of utility-scale project cost, per NREL/TP-7A40-83586) with a 20-30% earthwork-reduction figure of its own that carries no citation. The specific savings number is PVFARM’s, not NREL’s.
- Electrical package. PVFARM routes string cables automatically along the shortest path to the transformer, offers Trunk Bus and Harness wiring schemes with voltage-drop-based sizing, and produces a cable bill of quantities.
- Interface. Browser interface designed for solar workflows rather than a general CAD environment.
- Recent momentum. PVFARM ships a public API and SSO, reached SOC 2 Type 1 certification in February 2026, won a Solar Power World award in November 2025, and keeps a monthly release cadence.
PVFARM fits browser-based preliminary solar design when native AutoCAD integration is not required. It is rated 4.4/5 on G2 from 14 reviews.
Where the cloud model breaks down
The limitations of cloud-only design become visible when a project moves past feasibility into detailed engineering.
No native CAD integration. Every EPC and engineering firm doing detailed design works in AutoCAD or Civil 3D. A cloud tool creates a parallel workflow. Terrain data gets exported from CAD, uploaded to the cloud platform, processed, then exported back. Every transfer is a potential data loss point. Every round trip adds time.
Output format gap. Construction teams need DWG/DXF files for IFC (Issued for Construction) documentation. Cloud platforms typically export reports and data files rather than native CAD drawings. Converting cloud outputs into construction-ready CAD drawings requires manual work, and manual work introduces errors.
Terrain resolution limits. Cloud processing must balance server cost against accuracy. Uploading a full-resolution topo surface (millions of points from drone surveys or LiDAR) to a browser-based engine introduces compression, simplification, or processing queues. Working natively in AutoCAD means your terrain model stays at full resolution throughout design.
Data sovereignty. Your site topography, soil reports, and project layouts live on someone else’s servers. For some organizations and some geographies, this is a nonstarter.
Where PVX goes deeper
PVX is not trying to be a cloud platform. It is an extension that adds terrain-aware solar design directly into AutoCAD.
Soil hardness classification. PVX maps soil types across the entire site surface before any grading decisions are made. On one project, 44% of the terrain was classified as “very hard” rock (concrete/asphalt grade). The grading strategy for rock and the grading strategy for soil are fundamentally different. Knowing the subsurface composition changes which approach saves money and which approach is even physically possible.
Multi-scenario grading comparison. PVX compares grading approaches side by side in the same session. On a single project, three approaches were evaluated:
| Approach | Method | Cut volume | Cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Full smoothing | Traditional | 118,225 m3 | $1,062,481 |
| Pile-adaptive | Adapt terrain to pile | 48,109 m3 | $438,046 |
| Table splitting + pile-adaptive | Split tables, then adapt | 34,819 m3 | $335,376 |
The difference between the conventional approach and the optimized approach: $727K on one project. 70% less earthwork volume. Same panels, same site.
Construction-ready outputs. Because PVX runs inside AutoCAD, its outputs are native DWG files. Pile coordinates, grading contours, cross-sections, cable routes. These go directly into IFC documentation without conversion. The construction team gets the same file the design team produced. Following recent performance improvements, PVX.Cad handles plants of roughly 2 GW in a single DWG, so large designs do not need to be split across drawing files.
Cable topology optimization. PVX auto-generates cable routes for three topologies (Line, U-shape, Leapfrog) and calculates voltage drop per string, not per average. On a 130 MWp project, the cabling topology choice alone represented a $430K cost difference.
Battery storage design
As of July 2026, PVFARM ships no BESS capability. In June 2026 it announced RE PILOT expanding into standalone BESS and solar-plus-storage sizing and siting economics, currently in beta with general availability targeted for Q3 2026 (PVFARM’s press release).
Their announced BESS play is upstream: sizing and siting economics, helping teams decide how much storage and where before a design exists. Nothing shipped or announced covers code compliance, clearances, augmentation planning, noise, or fire lanes.
PVX.Cad’s BESS design ships today. Placements are validated against named fire-code rule-sets (NFPA 855 2020, 2023, and 2026 editions, and IFC 2018, 2021, and 2024 editions), with compliance reports that cite the exact section a placement satisfies or violates, for example NFPA 855-2023 section 9.5.2.6.1. Clearance validation runs live, flagging violations as you move equipment rather than after the fact. Augmentation planning reserves pads and projects per-transformer loading for future capacity additions. Noise contours at 45, 55, and 65 dBA surface lot-line findings before a neighbor complaint becomes a permitting problem. Fire lane generation and BESS pad grading are integrated with the terrain model, and standalone BESS projects (no PV array required) are supported.
The gap here is not depth versus depth. It is shipped versus announced.
Yield probability and financial assessment
PVFARM’s in-house yield engine is publicly benchmarked against PVsyst, landing within 1 to 5.3% agreement. Its live LCOE Cost Map, added February 2026, prices every block in dollars per watt.
What it does not do: no P50/P90 probabilistic yield output, no NPV, IRR, DSCR, or payback analysis, and no assessment report product. Their path to a bankable number runs through a PVsyst export.
PVX.Assess is a report generated from the completed PVX.Cad design: 8-factor risk screening (terrain slope, snow load, soil erosion, grid access to lines, substations, and plants, environmental constraints, production uncertainty, drainage, and river flood), with flood, erosion, and grid proximity carrying particular weight on utility-scale sites. It produces screening-grade P50/P75/P90 yield and financial analysis including NPV, IRR, LCOE, DSCR, and payback.
PVFARM’s Cost Map prices a block. PVX.Assess screens, at a preliminary level, whether the project’s financials pencil out, from probability of yield through DSCR.
Comparison table
| Capability | PVFARM | PVX |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | Cloud (browser) | AutoCAD extension |
| AutoCAD integration | None | Native |
| Web/browser access | Full platform | PVX.View (viewer + sharing) |
| Grading optimization | Yes (cloud engine) | Yes (on full-res topo surface) |
| Soil hardness mapping | Not documented | Yes (per-cell classification) |
| Multi-scenario grading comparison | Spreadsheet-based scenario comparison (Civil module) | Side-by-side in same session, embedded cost table, soil-hardness-aware, plus hydrology |
| Output format | Cloud exports | Native DWG/DXF |
| IFC-ready drawings | Requires conversion | Direct output |
| Cable topology analysis | Automatic routing (Trunk Bus/Harness) | 3 named topologies compared + per-string voltage drop |
| Terrain resolution | Server-constrained | Full local resolution |
| Data location | Cloud servers | Your machine |
| Installation required | No | Yes (AutoCAD + PVX extension) |
| Onboarding speed | Fast | Requires AutoCAD familiarity |
| Collaboration | Built-in (cloud-native) | PVX.View for stakeholders, CAD for engineers |
| Battery storage (BESS) | None shipped as of July 2026; RE PILOT sizing beta announced June 2026 | Code-aware placement citing NFPA 855 / IFC sections, augmentation planning, noise contours, fire lanes, standalone BESS |
| Yield probability and financials | Deterministic yield (PVsyst-validated engine), LCOE cost map; no P50/P90, no NPV/IRR/DSCR | PVX.Assess report: P50/P75/P90, NPV, IRR, LCOE, DSCR, payback, 8-factor risk screening |
Which tool is right for you
PVFARM makes sense if:
- Your team does not use AutoCAD for detailed design
- You need fast feasibility screening across many sites
- Cloud accessibility matters more than CAD-native depth
- Your projects are on relatively flat terrain where grading is straightforward
PVX makes sense if:
- Your engineering team already works in AutoCAD or Civil 3D
- You do detailed design on complex or sloped terrain
- Construction-ready DWG outputs are a requirement, not a nice-to-have
- You need to compare multiple grading strategies before committing
- Soil composition varies across the site and affects grading decisions
- Your projects go through formal IFC documentation
The honest answer for most utility-scale EPC firms doing detailed engineering: you already have AutoCAD. Your civil team works in AutoCAD. Your IFC packages are DWG files. Adding terrain-aware solar design inside that environment removes a data transfer step that cloud tools cannot avoid.
For teams evaluating early-stage feasibility without CAD infrastructure, PVFARM’s cloud model offers a lower barrier to entry. But when the project moves to detailed design and construction documentation, the outputs need to be in CAD.
PVX gives you both: PVX.Cad for the engineering depth, PVX.View for the stakeholder accessibility. Design where your engineers work. Share where your stakeholders are.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the main difference between PVFARM and PVX?
PVFARM is a cloud-based platform that runs in a browser. PVX is an AutoCAD extension that runs inside the CAD environment where engineering teams already work. Both offer grading analysis, but PVX works on the full-resolution topo surface locally with soil hardness classification and multi-scenario grading comparison.
Does PVFARM integrate with AutoCAD?
No. PVFARM is entirely browser-based. Terrain data must be exported from CAD, uploaded to the cloud, processed, and then exported back. PVX.Cad runs natively inside AutoCAD, so terrain analysis, grading, layout, and electrical design all happen in the same environment without data transfers.
Where does my terrain data live with each tool?
With PVFARM, terrain data is uploaded to their cloud servers. PVX.Cad keeps design data on the engineer’s local machine during the core design workflow. Data leaves the workstation only when the user explicitly publishes a project to PVX.View or submits it to PVX.Assess as a cloud job.
Which tool produces IFC-ready construction drawings?
PVX.Cad outputs native DWG/DXF drawings plus earthworks, pile-coordinate, cable-schedule, and BoQ files from the same AutoCAD project. PVFARM’s public documentation does not show native DWG construction output from its cloud engine, and converting cloud outputs into construction-ready AutoCAD drawings may require additional work.
Does PVFARM offer soil hardness classification?
PVFARM does not document soil hardness classification as a feature. PVX.Cad maps soil types across the entire site surface using a 7-class system (very soft to very hard rock) before any grading decisions are made. Knowing the subsurface composition changes which grading approach is feasible and which saves the most.
Can PVFARM compare multiple grading approaches?
Yes, to a degree. PVFARM’s Civil module includes spreadsheet-based multi-scenario grading comparison. PVX.Cad compares three approaches (full smoothing, pile-adaptive, table splitting) side by side in the same session, with an embedded cost table per scenario, soil-hardness-aware classification, and hydrology-aware analysis, so you can see the tradeoffs before committing.
Does PVFARM support battery storage (BESS) design?
Not yet. As of July 2026 PVFARM ships no BESS capability. In June 2026 it announced RE PILOT, a beta for standalone BESS and solar-plus-storage sizing and siting economics, with general availability targeted for Q3 2026. PVX.Cad ships BESS design today: code-aware placement validated against NFPA 855 and IFC rule-sets, augmentation planning, noise contours, and fire lanes.
Does PVFARM produce financial analysis?
PVFARM calculates LCOE, including a live cost map by block. It does not produce P50/P90 probabilistic yield, NPV, IRR, DSCR, or payback analysis, and has no assessment report product. PVX.Assess generates a report from the completed design with P50/P75/P90 yield and financial analysis including NPV, IRR, LCOE, DSCR, and payback.
Last updated: July 13, 2026. 3.8 TWp designed with PVX.AI across 40+ countries. Competitor data sourced from public websites, documentation, and G2 reviews.
