Imagethief

Okay i did some comparing now and apparently the culprit for the high mass was "Compensate outer wall overlaps" not being ticked. However filament consumption is still 77m vs 206m which doesn't make a lot of sense to me since the mass is 616g vs 615g... Will do some more comparing. Forgot that they use different filament diameters, i am dumb.

Could you give any examples? I never thought I would run into such a problem with another printer, because the difference in consumption is immense.

When using different printers to slice some very thin-walled and supported parts, the mass and material consumption varies massively when sliced with Ultimaker S5 and say Creality CR10-S4. I uploaded a 200x200x200 cube file that replicates or imitates my situation very well. It's a cube that has a wall thickness of 0.5mm and i manually added some extra support inside (I am not using the infill setting because i want to control the location of the support better). Both are done with 0.4mm nozzle and 100% infill. Picture "1.png" is Ultimaker S5 (comparable result with my CAD mass result), picture "2.png" is Creality CR10-S4. I even took the Ultimaker profile and exported it, but the result was the same. Previewing the layers i didn't see anything that seemed off or wrong... Does anyone know what's going on here? Cube.STL