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

91–100 of 171 posts

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

#91

Post by fnordpiglet »

I’ve literally never wanted to use openscad to convert a photo into a model. Usually I have a functional requirement such as making an en enclosure with a spec sheet to work from on the enclosed device.

Claude 4.6 before the lobotomy in Claude code was able to take a PSU spec sheet and my requirements for glands and ports, use YAPP and openscad MCPs to iteratively and unassisted build end to end a printable enclosure that was perfectly suited for the PSU with right dimensions and screw holes, mountings, grills, gland ports, everything, placed for optimal printing. This was the moment I felt like LLMs had really arrived.

A photo of a building? Why. That’s a mesh problem and is about fidelity. A technical spec sheet and diagrams to functional print with intelligent choices about the functional part baked in? That’s useful.

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

#92

Post by plumeria »

pshirshov wrote: post #85

That's curious, I've been trying to do some parametric modeling with Claude - and its performance was abysmal.

I've had a positive experience building a library of parametric HVAC duct parts using Claude, Gemini and Codex using build123d (they all review the specs and code collaboratively).

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

#93

Post by nutjob2 »

ReptileMan wrote: post #4

The only thing faster moving that AI these days are the goalposts. Three years ago we would have been amazed if models were able to produce anything, now we have the luxury of nitpicking. Even the worst entries in the benchmark are quite impressive.

Welcome to human nature.

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

#94

Post by nutjob2 »

xnx wrote: post #22
LatencyKills wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Things mature, and expectations grow appropriately. That is true of more than just LLM performance.

Sure, but it's good to have some perspective and some awe that any of this would've been absolute unbelievable magic just 3 years ago. Even if all AI progress stopped immediately, we'd need 10 years to digest and incorporate the technology.

Why look back in awe when technological innovation will just keep accelerating. Soon what we have today will seem quaint. Best to keep looking forward with impatience and discontent.

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

#96

Post by nutjob2 »

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…

> For East Asians like myself, it levels the playing field with Westerners

Why do you say that? Are there language or cultural disadvantages to being East Asian?

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

#97

Post by alnwlsn »

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 :/

The normal people are the ones not writing comments, but I'll give you one 'cause you asked:

I'm a Solidworks user. Most Solidworks or other pro CAD users would consider OpenSCAD kind of like MS Paint. Yes, you can draw the Mona Lisa in it, but it doesn't really work the same way.

Even so, the examples shown here are better than what I've seen before. They seem to be on the right track using images instead of long paragraphs of text to try to describe the object. They are still missing the constraints and dimensions that come naturally to pro cad users (it can be done manually in openscad of course), but if you're just making a video game it's probably going to be fine for that.

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

#99

Post by skinner927 »

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…

Claude does well if you can provide all dimensions. It fails at guessing though. The real magic is when you can provide one dimension or photograph with a ruler in it and the AI will figure the rest out. Right now, Claude anyways, is pretty bad at guessing.

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

#100

Post by emmanuelsemugga »

This is a really important project. Preserving humanity’s knowledge and making it openly accessible,including in formats usable by AI systems feels like one of the most valuable things happening right now. Thank you for the clear technical instructions and the bulk download options.

Projects like Anna’s Archive make it much easier for researchers and builders to work responsibly with large datasets.

Post reply on HN