Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark
83 points
1 hour ago
| 13 comments
| modelrift.com
| HN
jhot
17 minutes ago
[-]
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 put in a 0.3mm subtraction in the x/y dimensions and I lowered it to 0.1 and it's perfect.

Much easier shape than ancient Roman architecture but still very cool how easy it was.

reply
jetter
3 minutes ago
[-]
these small functional prints are exactly where OpenSCAD and LLM generation shines
reply
mellosouls
1 hour ago
[-]
Antigravity may well Top the whatever benchmark but:

My Antigravity (forced) replacement for Gemini CLI requires me to log on via browser every time I use it, and my Antigravity IDE won't update at all, so:

If it's ok I'd prefer they just work on reaching a baseline acceptable rollout before worrying about being Top in anything.

Ps actual title:

OpenSCAD LLM Benchmark: Building the Pantheon

reply
VectorLock
7 minutes ago
[-]
The forced upgrade from Gemini CLI which I liked as much, and as some ways better than Claude Code was bad. But them just sending out that email on Wednesday that basically said "Thanks for subscribing to Google One AI Pro, as of right now we're adding limits to your account. Tough shit you get nothing." left a REALLY bad taste in my mouth. I had previously praised the "AI Pro" subscription as a good value.
reply
jetter
57 minutes ago
[-]
I agree, my main concern regarding Google AI products is this endless pain around the UX of login / billing / upgrades / product sunsets... but their LLM models are good and Antigravity 2.0 is not that bad either (unless you lost all you Antigravity 1.0 setup and projects - like many people did)
reply
pelagicAustral
1 hour ago
[-]
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)?
reply
freedomben
59 minutes ago
[-]
I'm not GP, but I am somewhat excited about antigravity CLI. I adopted Gemini CLI early and really liked it, though over time it got dumber and dumber until a point when I realized it was foolish to use it instead of claude/codex. I'm hopefuly that antigravity CLI won't go through that path, but also can't fight a skepticism.
reply
freedomben
1 hour ago
[-]
Having my workflow disrupted is the main reason I never adopted Antigravity, despite liking it. I'm glad to see G is invested, but the older I get the more protective I am of my workflow.
reply
hootz
18 minutes ago
[-]
And the only realistic way to protect our workflow is by avoiding vendor lock-in like the plague.
reply
the_real_cher
46 minutes ago
[-]
Wild that it doesn't cache the creds.
reply
elaus
42 minutes ago
[-]
Just to clarify: I believe it should cache them (it works for me).

So far I like it much more than Gemini CLI (my previous daily driver for personal projects). Seems more mature and "feels more intelligent" (very subjective ofc)

reply
megiddo
5 minutes ago
[-]
This would be the same Antigravity 2.0 that "surprise, no longer an IDE, did I forget to mention that? Lolol."
reply
dhfbshfbu4u3
45 minutes ago
[-]
Still a long way from shorting Autodesk.

As a side note Autodesk released an agentic assistant back in December for Fusion. Six months later it is still quite bad.

reply
a3w
13 minutes ago
[-]
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?

reply
debarshri
25 minutes ago
[-]
I have been using GPT 5.5 to build a video game. Benchmark sounds about right. It generates assets and sprite good enough, if not closer to AAA level games. Will check antigravity now.
reply
phn
21 minutes ago
[-]
Would you be able to share a bit about your workflow? Have been meaning to try AI gen for game models, and would love to know how people are tackling this.
reply
faangguyindia
36 minutes ago
[-]
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?
reply
embedding-shape
15 minutes ago
[-]
If you have a model that only know how to model CAD but also doesn't know history, and was trained on visual language of said history, how is it supposed to be able to model the Pantheon in the first place? It'd only be able to model exactly what you can describe with text, or even worse, exactly what it'd be able to visually extract from images via the vision encoders, for "vision models", but it'd be a far cry from what you see in this blogpost, would be my guess.
reply
xnx
25 minutes ago
[-]
> 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.

reply
nycdatasci
10 minutes ago
[-]
And yet 300+140=460. A very jagged surface indeed. https://gemini.google.com/share/c2a187275e26
reply
spiderfarmer
54 minutes ago
[-]
Next month they'll be beaten again.

And next year Google will probably sunset Antigravity.

If it doesn't make Google billions, don't trust them.

reply
PunchTornado
52 minutes ago
[-]
Plenty of google products dont make billions and they are still alive
reply
serf
42 minutes ago
[-]
you mean the stuff they handle that has a real national/security/surveillance purpose, like gmail and yt?

I can't imagine why (or who) that'd be kept alive for..

funny how some of their projects have undisclosed budgets and profits.

reply
toasty228
34 minutes ago
[-]
Which ones are not massive data traps or ad delivery mechanisms ?
reply
smcl
43 minutes ago
[-]
Google are infamously ruthless with their products, see https://killedbygoogle.com/
reply
ReptileMan
1 hour ago
[-]
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.
reply
ramon156
49 minutes ago
[-]
No one asked for faster horses, they still became obsolete when cars came. Nothing new
reply
LatencyKills
57 minutes ago
[-]
Things mature, and expectations grow appropriately. That is true of more than just LLM performance.
reply
xnx
21 minutes ago
[-]
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.
reply
LatencyKills
7 minutes ago
[-]
As someone who's been building developer tools (Visual Studio and Xcode) for 25 years, I don't have a perspective problem. We were doing "code completion" back in the 90s and could never have predicted that an LLM would write code at the current level of quality.

My point is that with every new model release, the expectations grow. I don't know how else to say that.

reply
bobbycastorama
8 minutes ago
[-]
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 :/

reply
frank00001
7 minutes ago
[-]
We are just reading the comments.
reply
elorant
7 minutes ago
[-]
Both parts seem pretty normal to me.
reply
beanjuiceII
33 minutes ago
[-]
google..no thanks
reply
jdw64
20 minutes ago
[-]
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 AI's output, it's a perfectly viable tool.

However, the absolute farce we just witnessed with the antiGravity2.0 update really raises doubts about whether 'vibe coding' can actually be trusted. If even a behemoth like Google is dropping the ball like this, it says a lot.

reply
embedding-shape
16 minutes ago
[-]
> AI billing models are fragmented ... IDE is currently tripping over something as trivial ... farce we just witnessed with the antiGravity2.0 update

I'm sorry, but that sounds exactly like almost every single Google "product" out there, they seem to only care about throwing stuff over the wall as quickly as possible, and you'd have a hard time finding a single Google product that doesn't also feel filled with fragmented choices, like every project of theirs have a different project manager every week.

reply