Will powder-based 3D printers be replaced by giga farms of desktop FFF 3D printers
3DP War Journal #51
Until recently, it was widely believed that the future of additive rapid manufacturing with polymers would be based on powder technologies (SLS and MJF). However, market reports from 2024 indicate that users have a different perspective on this matter…
Polymer powder-bed fusion (PBF) technologies — both laser-based and thermal-based — are considered the most efficient AM processes. They allow for the production of the largest number of parts per build cycle relative to the build chamber size. With well-optimized part nesting, they can also achieve minimal material waste.
The main advantage of SLS and MJF methods is that they do not require support structures and allow for part stacking and nesting. This means we are not limited by the XY build plate area as in FFF, SLA, or DLP, but can fully utilize the Z-axis volume as well.
Additionally, they offer true geometric freedom — the only real limitation is the minimum wall thickness of around 0.4 mm (+/- 0.2 mm depending on the part geometry and the packing density in the build chamber).
So, in theory, SLS and MJF are the most productive additive manufacturing methods. Designed for rapid manufacturing.
But there are three major reservations…
The cost of a new SLS or MJF machine is several hundred thousand EUR/USD (desktop versions from Formlabs or Sinterit are, of course, much cheaper, but not as efficient; these are not 3D printers for serial production like EOS, HP, or Farsoon machines).
The material options are limited to three types: polyamides, TPU, and polypropylene (and the latter is still more talked about than actually used).
The material cost is quite high for serial production — it loses not only to injection molding granulate (which is obvious) but also to FFF filaments and SLA/DLP resins.
Additionally, the often-mentioned "low material waste" is somewhat debatable because minimizing the amount of sintered powder really depends on the type of production. Some parts have geometries that cannot be efficiently packed in the chamber, and a significant amount of powder ends up needing to be refreshed or mixed.
Post-processing has also never been easy — though the sheer printing productivity used to somewhat make up for this.
In any case, by the late 2010s and early 2020s, there was no real alternative.
FFF 3D printers were slow and did not offer sufficient quality. The cheaper they were, the less reliable they became.
It was similar with resins — cheap LCD-based 3D printers didn’t offer high efficiency and also came with a tough post-processing workflow (just as cumbersome as with PBF).
But then came mid-2022, and Bambu Lab’s X1 appeared on Kickstarter. In the second half of that same year, everything turned upside down…
Bambu Lab’s 3D printers were not only much faster than any previous FFF 3D printer but also offered high-quality printing, and most importantly — high repeatability and reliability.
Soon, other manufacturers followed Bambu Lab’s lead, adjusting their 3D printers to the new standard set by the Chinese company. It even reached a point where, at last year’s Formnext, Josef Průša (unofficially) abandoned his flagship Prusa i3 design and presented the Core One based on CoreXY kinematics.
Bambu Lab offered its 3D printers at low prices — in fact, considering their functionality and the quality of components used — they were the most affordable on the market.
Of course, other Chinese companies like Creality and Elegoo quickly caught up, offering their devices at even lower prices (at least in terms of sticker price).
And somewhere between 2023 and 2024, it started…
A new wave of 3D printing entrepreneurs, realizing the obvious advantages of the new generation of 3D printers (low cost, high quality, and high efficiency), began to buy them in large quantities, creating massive farms with hundreds of machines.
And they started printing not necessarily "smart things," but things that other people actually wanted to buy.
I sort of knew this was happening — but just intuitively. I had a feeling.
But a few months ago, I started working on the latest VoxelMatters report — "Polymer AM Market 2025" — and I looked at the numerical data provided to me.
Guys, it’s an abyss. The number of FFF 3D printers sold compared to polymer PBF. You simply can't overlook it.
Seriously, the difference in the numbers is really, really huge. Obviously, I can’t share them with you, so you’ll have to take my word for it.
(Just for the record, no one at VM is paying me to say this, and I don’t earn any commission from report sales. I’m writing this as a co-author who’s proud of his work — which has already been paid for.)
I spent a long time thinking about what these numbers actually mean. Where they come from. And the conclusion is clear:
The adoption of 3D printers by the consumer sector is undeniable, but businesses are using them on a large scale in 3D printing farms.
Because let’s be honest — just 3-4 years ago, we called a 3D printer farm a setup with 10-15 machines. I myself had over 70 of them at GREENFILL3D and I was proud of that number.
Today, a 3D printer farm with 100 machines is considered standard.
Record holders, like JinQi from Carolyn Schwaar’s article on ALL3DP, have 2,500 machines (probably even more by now).
What’s more, improvements in 3D printing algorithms have made it possible to print parts today that, just 2-3 years ago, were either impossible or extremely difficult to produce on FFF systems. Just take a look:
The differences between what can be produced with SLS/MJF and FFF are slowly disappearing.
Which brings us to the question from the title: Will SLS and MJF 3D printers be replaced by FFF 3D printers working in farm systems?
Well, right now, today, that sounds like heresy because it challenges the long-standing paradigm described at the very beginning.
Rapid Manufacturing = Powder Bed Fusion.
And let’s not forget the over-decade-old stereotype that:
Desktop-grade printer = low-quality, low-volume crap.
But this stereotype hasn’t been true for more than two years now, and the old paradigm is starting to crumble.
Because today, business owners are asking themselves: What is more cost-effective to buy?
one SLS machine for 250,000 EUR,
or one hundred Bambu Lab X1C printers for 115,000 EUR?
or maybe one hundred Elegoo Centauri Carbons for just 33,000 EUR?
And young (new) entrepreneurs just entering the 3D printing world don’t even think about this — PBF technologies are as unfamiliar and as abstractly expensive to them as anything else out of reach. They simply buy FFF printers right away.
But to be fair — 3D printing farms also have their downsides and limitations:
One hundred 3D printers need a lot of space, substantial infrastructure, and, most importantly, one hundred power outlets.
You need filament stock in quantities that are multiples of 100 (at least two spools per printer). The same goes for spare parts.
You need many people for operation and maintenance.
You need a reliable system to manage the workflow of large-scale 3D printing farms.
And as soon as the number of printers grows beyond 100, the figures in points 1-3 need to scale accordingly.
Still, it’s becoming increasingly clear that, in many cases, running an FFF 3D printer farm is simply more cost-effective than investing in SLS or MJF.
And honestly, the numbers from the VoxelMatters report are practically screaming this!
Whew… This is a really long article. There are many topics I didn’t cover, but if I had, it would have been so long you probably wouldn’t have made it to the end.
So let me just clarify a few points:
Yes, SLS and MJF have a range of certifications for military, aerospace, medical, and other regulated applications, while FFF generally does not. But parts requiring such certifications are not that common (meaning they definitely don’t make up 20% of all printed parts, right?). Also, I’m not saying PBF 3D printers will disappear from the market — they may continue to be used specifically for certified products.
There’s this old stereotype that SLS and MJF are for polyamides, while FFF is just for colorful PLA or PETG. That’s outdated. Take a look at the portfolio of technical materials from leading manufacturers — there are now dozens of material types, not just PA and TPU.
Resin-based 3D printing farms actually deserve a separate article, as do SLS farms based on Formlabs or Sinterit 3D printers — that’s also a really interesting topic!
Thank you for reading this!
#7. Nikon SLM Solutions and ArianeGroup partnered for large-scale metal 3D printing
Nikon SLM Solutions and ArianeGroup have formed a strategic partnership to advance ultra-large metal additive manufacturing (exceeding 1m³) using powder bed fusion. The collaboration will enhance aerospace component production, meeting strict quality standards while enabling functional integration and performance optimization.
ArianeGroup, a leader in space launchers and defense systems, will leverage Nikon SLM’s technology for complex, high-performance parts. The partnership underscores additive manufacturing’s role in reducing costs and lead times for critical space applications.
READ MORE: www.voxelmatters.com
#6. 3YOURMIND joined EUDIS accelerator for defense innovation
3YOURMIND has been selected among 20 companies for the first European Defence Innovation Scheme (EUDIS) Business Accelerator. The eight-month program includes mentorship and boot camps, culminating in a €65,000 seed voucher.
The company’s AI-driven platform streamlines spare part production for defense sustainment. Previously working with the US military, 3YOURMIND now aims to strengthen Europe’s defense supply chains through digital manufacturing solutions.
READ MORE: www.voxelmatters.com
#5. Rosen Law Firm filed a class action lawsuit against 3D Systems Corporation
Rosen Law Firm filed a class action lawsuit against 3D Systems Corporation, alleging it misled investors between August 13, 2024, and May 12, 2025. The complaint claims 3D Systems understated the impact of declining customer orders and overstated its resilience during tough market conditions. It also accuses the company of insufficiently disclosing milestone changes in its United Therapeutics partnership, which may have hurt expected revenue.
READ MORE: www.3druck.com
#4. Oerlikon Additive Manufacturing delivered its 25,000th 3D-printed suppressor
Oerlikon Additive Manufacturing announced reaching a milestone by delivering its 25,000th 3D-printed suppressor, manufactured at its Huntersville, North Carolina facility. The single-piece suppressors, made via laser powder bed fusion using nickel alloy powder, offer lower back pressure and improved durability compared to traditional multi-part designs.
In 2023, Oerlikon shifted its AM production to the U.S. to align with key growth sectors, including aerospace and semiconductors. The company also secured contracts with Airbus for 3D-printed satellite components and with ArianeGroup for heat exchangers used in the Ariane 6 rocket.
READ MORE: www.voxelmatters.com
#3. Ricoh USA has launched Ricoh 3D for Healthcare, LLC
Ricoh USA has launched Ricoh 3D for Healthcare, LLC, a new company focused on expanding the use of FDA-cleared, patient-specific medical devices. The new structure aims to meet growing demand and support hospitals with on-site manufacturing of regulated 3D-printed models and devices. Ricoh 3D for Healthcare also partners with medical technology innovators like Kallisio and Insight Surgery to deliver advanced personalized solutions nationwide.
READ MORE: www.tctmagazine.com
#2. Formlabs has introduced two innovative materials: Color Resin V5 and True Cast Resin
Formlabs has introduced two innovative materials: Color Resin V5 and True Cast Resin. Color Resin V5 allows users to order fully customized resin colours, manufactured in as little as one week, starting from just one litre. It’s ideal for colour-coded jigs, prototypes, and end-use parts, offering performance comparable to Formlabs’ general-purpose resins.
True Cast Resin enables highly detailed casting patterns with minimal ash content and smooth burnout, perfect for jewellery and engineering. Both resins are supported by advanced updates to Formlabs' PreForm software.
READ MORE: www.tctmagazine.com
#1. Farsoon launched FS621M-Cu for large-scale copper 3D printing
Farsoon has unveiled its new FS621M-Cu, a large-format metal system designed for 3D printing copper alloys like CuCrZr. Equipped with four 1000W lasers, an anti-reflective chamber, and smart thermal management, it ensures stable printing of reflective materials. Test parts reportedly achieve thermal conductivity ≥345 W/(m·K) and thermal diffusivity ≥95 mm²/s.
Since 2017, Farsoon collaborated with an aerospace manufacturer to develop this solution. The machine has already produced a 600mm × 850mm thrust chamber liner—one of the largest monolithic copper parts ever 3D printed. Copper’s reflectivity poses challenges, often causing defects, but demand grows for aerospace cooling channels and space applications.
Competitors like Eplus3D and EOS are also advancing copper printing, focusing on process optimization and material properties. Emerging uses in semiconductors and e-mobility, such as Alloy Enterprises’ cooling solutions for AI data centers, highlight AM’s potential for innovative copper designs.
READ MORE: www.voxelmatters.com
Very insightful. Glad folks are catching on that 3D printing is a production tool, not just a hobby tool or for useful jigs