Three.js Reviews

The community submitted 42 reviews to tell us what they like about Three.js, what Three.js can do better, and more.

5.0

Based on 42 reviews

Review Three.js?

"Reviewers see Three.js as the practical default for browser-based 3D: approachable enough to get an interactive scene running quickly, yet flexible enough for custom rendering, animation, shaders, games, and large interactive environments. Users repeatedly praise its docs, examples, ecosystem, and smooth fit with React tools like react-three-fiber and drei. Makers of Netlify and Scholé cite it for browser rendering and avatars, while one user notes a real learning curve around shaders and performance on lower-end devices."

+39

Summarized with AI

Pros

3D rendering (3)

developer ecosystem (2)

Pros

Cons

Reviews

All Reviews

Most Informative

Founder Reviews (41)

Other Reviews (1)

Vincentt creates interactive camera experiences that run in the browser, so we needed full low-level control over rendering, performance and how 3D content combines with live camera and face-tracking input. Three.js gave us that without the overhead of writing raw WebGL. No-code tools like Spline and Womp are great for design but don't give the programmatic control and runtime flexibility we need. A-Frame was too opinionated for our architecture. Three.js has a huge ecosystem, excellent docs and examples, an active community, and it works well with the rest of our web stack. It also performs reliably on mobile browsers, which matters most for us since most of our users open experiences on their phones.

Three.js

WebGL made easy

WebGL made easy

Three.js Reviews

The community submitted 42 reviews to tell us what they like about Three.js, what Three.js can do better, and more.

What's great

What needs improvement

Alternatives Considered