Autodesk MeshMixer vs. Onshape

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
MeshMixer
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
MeshMixer is a 3D design and modeling tool for 3D printing or scanning, supported by Autodesk (acquired 2011). While not discontinued, the product will not receive updates and Autodesk states they intend to include all functionality in updates of Fusion 360.N/A
Onshape
Score 9.9 out of 10
N/A
Onshape is a cloud-native product development platform with integrated CAD, data management and analytics. Onshape aims to accelerate time to market and improve innovation by: 1) Access: Unlike file-based CAD which is on-premise only, Onshape enables remote access for designers and engineers from anywhere, and on any internet-connected device -including tablets and smart phones. 2) Collaboration: Onshape aims to eliminate the version control problems and blocking of file-based…
$1,500
per year per user
Pricing
Autodesk MeshMixerOnshape
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Standard
1,500
per year per user
Professional
2,500
per year per user
Enterprise
Contact sales team
per year per user
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
MeshMixerOnshape
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsNo dedicated hardware is required. Works on all web-connected devices including tablet, Chromebook, iPhone, Android.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Autodesk MeshMixerOnshape
Considered Both Products
MeshMixer
Chose MeshMixer
Using Blender for STL file preparation is like swatting a mosquito with a wrecking ball, plus its boolean functionalities can be glitchy.

ZBrushCoreMini proved too limiting as a sculpting tool, but so did Autodesk MeshMixer, so I am sticking to Sculptris.
Onshape
Chose Onshape
Better: Similar user interface and control scheme. Much better multi-body modeling. Real-time flattened sheet metal views. Faster to create robust models due to features like mate connectors and allowing fillets to work on multiple bodies. Doesn't need an expensive …
Chose Onshape
We chose Onshape for its ease of use and ultimately its mobility. Our mobile team wanted to be able to do work anywhere with a solid internet connection, instead of having to rely on bulky and tethered desktop machines or high powered laptops. All of Autodesk's products, while …
Chose Onshape
Onshape does not have complete feature parity with SOLIDWORKS. But neither does SOLIDWORKS have all the features Onshape has. The reasons we went with Onshape was the ability to collaborate and the lack of need for file management. There is also no need for an initial purchase. …
Chose Onshape
Onshape is quickly becoming the CAD software I recommend over any other. SolidWorks and Inventor are feature rich and leaders in the industry, however, Onshape is beginning to match them with constant updates and is already as feature rich as the two mentioned.
Chose Onshape
For us, we made the permanent switch from SOLIDWORKS to Onshape. SOLIDWORKS is a great product that we used for many years, but the file management and the transfer of large files were often hampering our progress. Onshape is just a little more agile for us!
Chose Onshape
Onshape is better than Solidworks for online / collaboration. Solidworks is better for the feature set and integration with other tools.
Rhino3D is better at surfacing and workflow with my optical design programs.
I have not used Fusion360 except for evaluating in general so I …
Chose Onshape
I have used Solidworks for over four years, and the vault system is time intensive for control of design history, and revision management. I have used Pro-E for over four years, and this has the capability but is not user-friendly. Not needing high-end computers is another …
Chose Onshape
OnShape was lower cost, with a reasonably comparable set of tools to Inventor and SolidWorks. The cost and ease of assimilation (ability to change mouse and keyboard shortcuts to Solidworks or Inventor controls) made the choice easier.
Chose Onshape
When we started the business we knew we wanted to use Macs for our day to day computer as we do a lot of programming both robot software as well as mobile apps and embedded firmware. This choice limited the number of selections we could look at as companies such as Solidworks …
Chose Onshape
We chose Onshape for a couple of reasons - the first is pricing. We were looking for a light-weight program that packs a heavyweight punch. The ability to access from any computer (Mac or PC) from anywhere is ultimately what sealed the deal for us. For our needs, there wasn't …
Chose Onshape
OnShape is a solid type design tool. Besides that, it provides working on the cloud environment.
Chose Onshape
OnShape is based in the cloud, which comes with all the benefits one would expect vs. desktop based software.

The two main things that lead me to select OnShape were cost and ease of adding new users/working as a team.
Chose Onshape
I've kind of already touched on this, but here's another take:

Onshape vs. Solidworks - Onshape is much cheaper, more usable, and does certain things much much better. It also removes many pain points I feel with Solidworks (SW). However, SW has decades of development and …
Chose Onshape
Onshape is in a different league than sketchup and is multiple times more powerful
Chose Onshape
Ease of use, the fact that it's in the cloud (so fast and always accessible) and intuitive design without clutter. TinkerCAD is only for beginners, Blender is for design and art, fusion 360 is cluttered and confusing, and SolidWorks is pretty close to onshape but its cost and …
Chose Onshape
Onshape wins out by far when it comes to the cloud and syncing aspect. I've had a lot of issues with SW epdm or trying to use Dropbox, or email, and anything that isn't stupidly easy to use is going to get used incorrectly. Onshape developed all of that right in, and it works …
Chose Onshape
I've used Solidworks for Cad and it is very heavy/intense software. Onshape is lightweight and easy to use. Solidworks has more add-ons like simulation and stress analysis which Onshape doesn't.
Chose Onshape
We also use Fusion 360 which is more appropriate for certain projects. We were all SolidWorks users, and we still use it from time to time as well.
Chose Onshape
The main reason that I selected Onshape over Solidworks is that it is significantly cheaper. Additionally, with the cloud-based updates, they are able to add functionality more quickly through updates, so in the long term I think their functionality will outpace that of …
Chose Onshape
Very easy to pick up coming from a SolidWorks background. Clearly it doesn't have quite as much high end functionality, but for basic needs it's just as good.
Chose Onshape
Onshape is a good competitor against other CAD systems. Solidworks and Solidedge still have more features than Onshape, but the gap is shrinking every 3 weeks. There are still some drawing features that have kept my supervisor from switching completely to Onshape himself, but …
Best Alternatives
Autodesk MeshMixerOnshape
Small Businesses
Onshape
Onshape
Score 9.9 out of 10
ARCHICAD
ARCHICAD
Score 8.6 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Onshape
Onshape
Score 9.9 out of 10
DraftSight
DraftSight
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
Rhino
Rhino
Score 9.1 out of 10
Rhino
Rhino
Score 9.1 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Autodesk MeshMixerOnshape
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
9.3
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.6
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
9.3
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Autodesk MeshMixerOnshape
Likelihood to Recommend
Autodesk MeshMixer is best for repairing STL files and basic modifications toward 3D printing. It is excellent for hollowing out models and adding escape holes for SLA printing or lost-wax casting. Its CSG (Boolean) functions to combine different meshes are good too and seldom cause the program to crash. There is even an integrated algorithm to optimize the layout of multiple files on a print bed in case of small-batch production. Autodesk MeshMixer's sculpting tools are there yet limited and there are a few better alternatives. Best of all, it is completely free.
Read full review
Onshape shall be used by organizations where cost is a major factor as the license is relatively competitive than the competition. Where Onshape , excels the most is the ability to be operational on any device with internet connection and webbrowser. Onshape doesn't require your hardware to be beefed with Graphic cards (if added better). Where onshape can be better. If they are able to include simulation packages bundled like SOLIDWORKS.
Read full review
Pros
  • Auto-repair function works fast, and if it does not completely cover all problem areas, manual fixes will work 99.5% of the time.
  • Remeshing algorithm is fairly slow but does a wonderful job in creating meshes with homogeneous or adaptive triangulation.
  • It contains a comprehensive set of tools to optimize and prepare STL files for 3D printing, such as hollowing and support generation.
Read full review
  • Cloud-based infrastructure and collaboration is a primary benefit.
  • The available documentation is extremely thorough.
  • The ability to integrate with other software for simulation, renderings, etc. is fantastic.
  • Not having to save and being able to clearly see versions and change history is excellent.
Read full review
Cons
  • The remeshing tool needs to be faster, as in some cases it takes up to a day of waiting time.
  • The sculpting tools need the addition of a proper brush for creating sharp creases and ridges.
  • The standard shape library is rather limited. It would be nice to have this connected to online repositories such as Thingiverse, MyMiniFactory, or Cults3D.
Read full review
  • I'm a Pro-user but I would like to have the possibility to have a pay-as-use option in some form. Now it is all or nothing (the public sharing of models - and model rights!) is not an option for many not-for-profit projects.
  • On-site hosting might help to sell the cloud concept to the more paranoid management.
  • Basic CAM generation would be awesome
  • Nonparametric modeling in some form or making it easier to use assemblies for those use cases where you want to model some parts and just play around moving things when you are exploring different configurations.
  • Doing Industrial Design type sketching and experimenting is not really a strong point on Onshape
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
Familiarity and ability to work from any location. Also easy to cooperate with potential customers, existing customers, systems users, and fabricating shops. Most of the standard designs are now in On Shape and I would like to continue using it. It is easier to run versions to clarify imrovements to the previous designs
Read full review
Usability
No answers on this topic
Onshape is great software and I have no trouble recommending it to CAD users and companies that need to do design work
Read full review
Support Rating
No answers on this topic
Been fairly standard experience with support team. Issues have always been addressed, but is understandably focused on business side applications which typically has different issues than education applications. I have very few IT issues with the design side of the software, my issues are more often with the control of users and access
Read full review
Online Training
No answers on this topic
I might be biased by coming from using three different CAD softwares in the past, so I already understood many modeling concepts, but the training OS offers is really good. Videos are clear, they explain operations in good detail and besides that OS has a really good help system that explains even more how every tool works.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
No answers on this topic
Onshape is revolutionary. Its advantage is that it can be used without having to download it. You are free to work wherever you want. This means that even if you take a vacation or attend a family event, your work will not be interrupted. You can still bring your work and complete it quickly.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Using Blender for STL file preparation is like swatting a mosquito with a wrecking ball, plus its boolean functionalities can be glitchy. ZBrushCoreMini proved too limiting as a sculpting tool, but so did Autodesk MeshMixer, so I am sticking to Sculptris. Materialise Magics and Netfabb are somewhat better at STL file repair and offer more advanced functionalities. But Magics does not remesh as well and Autodesk MeshMixer is far more compact and faster than Netfabb, so remains my weapon of choice.
Read full review
I have used SOLIDWORKS for over four years, and the vault system is time intensive for control of design history, and revision management. I have used Pro-E for over four years, and this has the capability but is not user-friendly. Not needing high-end computers is another great reason to choose Onshape
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • It speeds up projects by streamlining the CAD-to-3D-printing workflow
  • As an advanced user, I have written a few tutorials about it as well
Read full review
  • Poindexter By Design provides on demand mechanical engineering services and Onshape is directly responsible for a large portion of our customer base because of how easy it is to share and collaborate design projects. In most cases, we are literally up and running on new projects within an hour directly due to Onshape.
  • It is inevitable that a project will go through some level of scope creep. Poindexter By Design had a project with a 4-week deadline. Initially, we scheduled two engineers on the project but when the project's scope creep set in and the original deadline didn't change, we were very quickly and easily able to bring on a 3rd Poindexter By Design engineer on the project to handle the scope creep and still meet the deadline. Onshape gives our company the ability to very quickly increase our capacity on design projects with little to no effort and to us, this is priceless.
Read full review
ScreenShots