YouTube video by LARRUZ evaluating recent AI 3D generators. The speaker compares model outputs (notably "triple 1.4" vs "triple 2.0") on examples like a steampunk warrior and a simple ghost, finds triple 2.0 noticeably superior, and judges the results as approaching "good enough" for use in games or animation despite imperfections.
"triple 1.4" and "triple 2.0"
LARRUZ
Okay, hold up. I'm not even into 3D, but what's going on with AI 3D generators? This is a result from just a few months ago. And this is the brand new model that just came out. And this new model, triple 2.0, is supposed to be state of the art. Okay, let's do something hard like the steampunk warrior triple 1.4 versus triple 2.0 right here. Wow, the level of detail. So look, it's certainly not perfect, but I think this really crosses a line where I would say this is good enough. If you put this into a living world, a game, animation, whatever, I wouldn't mind this. This little ghost should be pretty simple to generate. So let's have a look. Yeah, it's clearly, it's just better in every single case. And I have to say, just as a beginner looking at this, it's an impressive tool.
