4K Texture · Ultra HD Mesh · Multi-view Input · Free · Commercial Use · API
Formerly known as Sparc3D and later Hitem3D, Hi3D entered the market with extremely high-resolution meshes and remains a leader in detailed geometry. Features 1536p Pro resolution and high-quality textures for production-ready assets. If you need the sharpest mesh detail available today, Hi3D is a top contender.
Hi3D · 6 video reviews
Reviews 1–1 of 6
1 article
Articles 1–1 of 1
Free plan ($0): 100 lifetime credits with limited features and downloads. Plan details
Formerly known as Sparc3D and later Hitem3D, Hi3D entered the market with extremely high-resolution meshes and remains a leader in detailed geometry. Features 1536p Pro resolution and high-quality textures for production-ready assets. If you need the sharpest mesh detail available today, Hi3D is a top contender.
75% win rate · 16 votes across modes
Community rating · out of 5
Community rating
43 ratings · 14 written reviews
Live performance in the current season. Closed seasons use recorded snapshots.
Arena Rank
#5 / 7
Segmentation ELO
991
Total votes
8
Win Rate
38%
3 wins · 5 losses
Total: 8 votes
Average Generation Cost
$0.75
Typical runtime: 3.0 min
Nearby ranks in Segmentation
#4 · 1005 ELO
Hi3D 2.1 Split to print is ranked #5 (991 ELO) while Tripo Segmentation v2.1 currently sits at #4 (1005 ELO).
Tripo Segmentation v2.1 holds a 14 point advantage, so Hi3D 2.1 Split to print fans tend to focus on prompts that highlight its strengths.
Hi3D 2.1 Split to print wins about 38% of its judged matches overall, compared to 67% for Tripo Segmentation v2.1.
Tripo Segmentation v2.1 often returns meshes quicker (1.5 min) while Hi3D 2.1 Split to print focuses on fidelity.
#6 · 987 ELO
Hi3D 2.1 Split to print is ranked #5 (991 ELO) while Rodin Gen-2.5 currently sits at #6 (987 ELO).
Hi3D 2.1 Split to print maintains a 4 point lead, which usually translates to steadier community votes.
Hi3D 2.1 Split to print wins about 38% of its judged matches overall, compared to 36% for Rodin Gen-2.5.
Hi3D 2.1 Split to print also tends to finish generations faster (3.0 min vs 6.0 min).
#3 · 1005 ELO
Hi3D 2.1 Split to print is ranked #5 (991 ELO) while Meshy 6 Auto Split currently sits at #3 (1005 ELO).
Meshy 6 Auto Split holds a 14 point advantage, so Hi3D 2.1 Split to print fans tend to focus on prompts that highlight its strengths.
Hi3D 2.1 Split to print wins about 38% of its judged matches overall, compared to 57% for Meshy 6 Auto Split.
Meshy 6 Auto Split often returns meshes quicker (1.5 min) while Hi3D 2.1 Split to print focuses on fidelity.
#7 · 981 ELO
Hi3D 2.1 Split to print is ranked #5 (991 ELO) while Roblox CubePart currently sits at #7 (981 ELO).
Hi3D 2.1 Split to print maintains a 9 point lead, which usually translates to steadier community votes.
Hi3D 2.1 Split to print wins about 38% of its judged matches overall, compared to 30% for Roblox CubePart.
What is the current Top 3D AI rank for Hi3D 2.1 Split to print?
Hi3D 2.1 Split to print is sitting at #5 with an arena ELO of 991. It has participated in 8 community votes so far.
How much does it cost to generate with Hi3D 2.1 Split to print?
Hi3D 2.1 Split to print reports an average generation cost of $0.75 per test with a typical runtime of 3.0 min.
When should I choose Hi3D 2.1 Split to print over Tripo Segmentation v2.1?
Hi3D 2.1 Split to print is ranked #5 (991 ELO) while Tripo Segmentation v2.1 currently sits at #4 (1005 ELO). Tripo Segmentation v2.1 holds a 14 point advantage, so Hi3D 2.1 Split to print fans tend to focus on prompts that highlight its strengths. Hi3D 2.1 Split to print wins about 38% of its judged matches overall, compared to 67% for Tripo Segmentation v2.1. Tripo Segmentation v2.1 often returns meshes quicker (1.5 min) while Hi3D 2.1 Split to print focuses on fidelity.
