GoKawiilWe ran a small practical benchmark: give several AI coding tools the same kind of task and ask them to build the Pantheon in OpenSCAD.
ModelRift generates OpenSCAD for every 3D model on the platform. The LLM’s ability to handle spatial geometry directly affects what we can ship, so we track how models improve on this kind of task.
The goal was to see how well each system could turn architectural reference material into parametric CAD code, using the OpenSCAD CLI to render previews and iterate.
The prompt was intentionally visual and architectural: build the Pantheon from reference images, including the rotunda, dome, portico, columns, pediment, and recognizable front details.
Overview of the six current benchmark results. Each thumbnail is labeled with the client and model used for that run.
Why Pantheon?
This was not a basic OpenSCAD syntax test. All of the current coding LLMs can produce a simple “cube with a hole” model in OpenSCAD perfectly well. That kind of prompt mostly tests whether the model knows difference() , cube() , and cylinder() .
The Pantheon is more useful as a benchmark because it sits in a middle ground. OpenSCAD is not a good fit for natural sculpted models, organic surfaces, or character-like geometry. It is much better at Boolean operations, radial symmetry, extrusions, and clean constructive shapes. The Pantheon has a large radial rotunda and dome, a central oculus, straight portico faces, columns, stepped bases, and a triangular pediment. That mix makes it illustrative without being impossible.
It is also recognizable. A weak result still looks vaguely like a domed building, but a better result has to get the relationship between the round drum, the rectangular portico, the dome rings, and the front facade roughly right.
Why OpenSCAD?
... continue reading