Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) projects are complex systems that are evaluated based on many factors. Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods are used to support AEC project teams in this process. Traditionally, these decisions are made using the Weighting, Rating and Calculating (WRC) method. Recent literature shows benefits of the Choosing By Advantages (CBA) method compared to WRC. However, these studies have been made in the context of comparing and ranking a small number of design alternatives (2-10). This research presents a case study in which CBA and WRC are applied to a large design space. The results show that CBA allowed for a more complete comparison of design alternatives. In addition, CBA enabled decision makers to explicitly evaluate performance versus cost, which led to more transparent and Pareto optimal decisions considering all alternatives in the design space.