Comparability of costs Architect vs. General Contractor

If we assume he builds the same, equivalent house with the same craftsmen (purely theoretically) as the GU

An architect will not build equivalently, but better planned (keyword: detailed plans instead of drywall improvisation); and yes: he can even practically build with the same GU – but then with your actively and constructively defined scope of work.

So if we wanted to build the GU's house with the architect, we would have to give him a budget of 350k euros, right?

Yes, you have to deduct his fee from the budget beforehand (and keep the same buffer as with the GU; that does not change).

It might also be mentioned that GU (or here rather GÜ) is not the same as GU (GÜ). Some are really high-quality there. I see the advantage primarily in well-known craftsmen whose affordable quality is part of the planning. An architect may specify, but with a bit of bad luck, you end up with an (unknown) craftsman who is "bad" despite the defined performance.

Thank you for the many responses. We hope that although we are on a similar cost level with the architect, the whole BVH will be more transparent. What we do not like at all are partly inexplicable additional charges in the offers from the GÜ/GU and especially the helplessness / lack of ideas when it comes to questions about the placement/planning of the house on the plot. It feels more like buying a car in a dealership, where they sell you a car – and they don’t care where you drive it. Ultimately, we would also pay several thousand euros more – but we imagine the process of getting to the house better with the architect. As of today, we could not sign any offer from the GU, as there are simply too many open questions. Let’s see what the architect says next week.

As I said, there are all sorts - even among the architects. ;)

I'll give you some feedback on our project. I have almost always rejected the general contractor because of the inflexibility after signing the contract. We are building with an architect (planning office) and individual trade assignments.

Con architect: you have to put quite a bit of money upfront without any turf being moved. So far, we have the approval planning and submission for the building permit. This is dragging on because we want geothermal energy. PRO: we are now switching temporarily to gas, and later we will switch to geothermal by means of an amendment. These "late decisions" or changes are definitely more stressful than with the general contractor but are manageable without major financial expenses.

A very clear con of the architect: MUCH more stress
A very clear pro: you still have the "hat on" and as the client you can make changes up to a certain degree

Acquaintances are building in parallel with a general contractor and are already further along; you notice here and there where the general contractor charges a lot, which definitely costs us more stress.

Home office/kindergarten closed/building with an architect, without family nearby —> really takes its toll (and not a stone has been laid yet)

As I said, there are all kinds - even among architects. ;)

Let's hope we don't get a bad apple! However, the architect has good references, we'll see. It's just a small planning office in the city where we come from.