Accuracy (Fluent is not as good as CFX, CFX's default difference scheme is second-order, but Fluent is difficult to converge with second-order scheme);

Reliability (fluency is not as good as CFX. In all fairness, CFX's coupled solver converges much faster than Fluent. The difference at that time was orders of magnitude. )

Parallel ability (fluency is not as good as CFX. These two softwares have calculated the outflow of aircraft on a multi-CPU cluster, and Fluent is too slow. )

Post-processing (Fluent's post-processing drawing is too rustic, and it is much more beautiful and professional than CFX's drawing. )

Each has its advantages and disadvantages. The advantages of cfx are rich physical models and powerful functions. The finite volume discretization method based on finite element has high accuracy, but the calculation speed is slow. Fluent physical model is relatively lacking, and there are many problems without corresponding model. For example, each phase in a multiphase flow cannot be multicomponent, nor can it be counted as a multiphase flow composed of wet air and other fluids. Moreover, the preprocessing format of fluent is closed and can only be applied to fluent, and the output format of cfx's preprocessing icem is rich.

I have been using cfx for a long time, and occasionally I use fluent. I know cfx has some shortcomings, and Fluent is strong in some aspects.

1.cfx has only one fully implicit solver, and fluent has three types: piecewise, fully explicit and fully implicit.

Although cfx scheme has fewer iterations, it consumes a lot of memory.

2.cfx's dynamic grid is my dirtiest, which is just Lager. Fluent is obviously much better in this respect.

3. There are many unknown functions in UDF (UserFortran in 3.CFX), so it is not easy to develop complex models. Fluent's UDF(C language) can provide relatively complete information query.

4.CFX's GUI is really better than Fluent's, and the pre-processing and post-processing of strings are very good, and the cooperation is enough. Fluent just doesn't focus on improving GUI, but they can all achieve the same function. Just get used to it. The focus of CFD code is whether it is easy to find the wrong solution without knowing it. Did the code developer minimize cfd code errors! GUI, unfriendly friends are not the point. Basically, the accuracy of the solution has a great relationship with the user's skills. For the same software, the same problem, some people are wrong, and some people are ok.

There are many users of the two softwares, so it is not easy to integrate them into one, but they can complement each other and improve at the same time.

6. As for the model, the latest academic or industry research results will probably be reflected in the solver model, which feels similar.