Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark

modelrift.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 171 posts

Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark

#51

Post by lifty »

xnx wrote: post #21
faangguyindia wrote: post #17

Why are specialized CAD making LLM models not showing up? In future are we going to have same model for everything? from programming to creative writing to CADs?

> In future are we going to have same model for everything? A model that knows more in general, will often be better at specific tasks. e.g. If you ask a model to "make a program that estimates the annual production of a solar installation", it needs to have been trained on a lot more than just Python code.

You might combine a general world model with a python coding model in that case. Not sure if it's better, just saying.

Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark

#52

Post by 0x696C6961 »

simplyluke wrote: post #39
jhot wrote: post #26

Last weekend I bought my wife a bike off marketplace. It was in good condition but was missing one of the internal cable routing grommets. I gave Claude pictures of the pill-shaped hole by itself and with my digital calipers in the long and short directions. Gave it a short prompt and it gave me an openscad model with everything parametrized. I printed with no changes in tpu and it was nearly perfect on the first try…

Yeah, CAD has been my personal example of "oh the barrier to entry for this skill was high enough that I didn't do it and now I can be passably bad at it enough to get some simple things done" I've had similar experiences with making simple functional parts off a 3d printer with OpenSCAD + LLMs. I'm very aware that the models are worse at it than say, generating react code, and I'm also the antithesis of a skilled pi…

Learning to make simple parts in onshape is pretty darn easy (and fun).

Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark

#53

Post by surajrmal »

jeromegv wrote: post #46
pelagicAustral wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just use Claude Code and intellij, so I don't understand why so many people complain about Antigravity ditching VS Code, what's the surface not covered by using Antigravity CLI + VS Code (or any other IDE)?

Gemini cli was open source. Antigravity cli is not. Not at feature parity, missing many features and now we are forced to migrate away from Gemini cli before anti gravity cli is ready.

The difference in its ability is immense. Even with less features it makes a lot of sense to switch. It really shows how much the harness matters almost equally to the model.

Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark

#56

Post by 05 »

amelius wrote: post #47
jhot wrote: post #26

Last weekend I bought my wife a bike off marketplace. It was in good condition but was missing one of the internal cable routing grommets. I gave Claude pictures of the pill-shaped hole by itself and with my digital calipers in the long and short directions. Gave it a short prompt and it gave me an openscad model with everything parametrized. I printed with no changes in tpu and it was nearly perfect on the first try…

Does it optimize for no support?

You optimize for no support when selecting print orientation (but for anything semi-cylindrical like described that would be the only sane orientation and the one slicer would choose when you smash the 'Auto Orientation' button).

Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark

#57

Post by NortySpock »

jdw64 wrote: post #24

To be brutally honest, I'm disappointed with antiGravity. It feels incredibly unGoogle-like. The AI billing models are fragmented, and the AntiGravity IDE is currently tripping over something as trivial as a basic Electron deployment config bug. Don't get me wrong, I don't think AI coding is a bad thing. For East Asians like myself, it levels the playing field with Westerners, so as long as you rigorously review the…

> I don't think AI coding is a bad thing. [...] it levels the playing field [...]

I'd like to put regional differences aside and say AI coding / LLMs are incredible tools.

While I'm nervous about my job as a programmer being able to pay a prevailing wage after the dust settles, I do hope that everyone gaining access to an AI coder / tutor will allow anyone to be able to achieve things they previously only dreamed of. If the tutor costs pennies per session, sure, the tutors are out of work, but I hope everyone can thus up-skill to work on the challenges they actually want to work on.

I'm taking baby-steps into coding in Elixir on the other monitor, a language I had only read about before, because an LLM is walking me through the changes, answering my questions, and accepting my rebuttals. There's no way I would have time to pick up the language otherwise.

Yesterday I vibe-coded some additions to the static site generator python script for my blog. It was awesome to be able to think in terms of desired features instead of digging around documentation for libraries and syntax.

Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark

#58

Post by andybak »

a3w wrote: post #29

Claude Code 2.1 / Opus 4.7 looks best to me: Dome and ceiling structure is correcter than the others. Why is this medium ranked, and not on par with the best two?

Dome looks wrong to me. Look at a few other photos - it's far from being a hemisphere

Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark

#59

Post by andybak »

bobbycastorama wrote: post #31

Why are half of the comments on Hackernews stereotypical AI-bros whose lives revolve around tech, and the other half sceptical commentators whose lives also revolve around tech but they are disappointed with its performance?! Where are the normal people :/

Why would a non-tech person be on Hacker News? Isn't the clue in the name?

Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark

#60

Post by 1970-01-01 »

Creating a single real-world object and declaring it a benchmark? No, it doesn't work that way for a robust tool. You need to do something like Iron Chef, with a Greek architecture theme and and a panel or judge that declares the winner. This is just seeing which tool subjectively makes the best looking Pantheon.
Post reply on HN