Softwr

Manufacturing · head to head

Fictiv vs SolveSpace

Fictiv logo

Fictiv

Manufacturing

On-demand custom manufacturing with instant CAD quoting, now owned by MISUMI

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
S

SolveSpace

CAD

Open source parametric CAD with a constraint solver in a few megabytes

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only SolveSpace has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: Fictiv this is a manufacturing service, not software you licence, so there is nothing to deploy or own and switching means re-sourcing parts rather than exporting data.; SolveSpace the in-house geometry kernel fails on complex boolean operations and fillets, and the failure is sometimes silent bad geometry rather than an error message, so models must be checked before export or manufacture.
  • They diverge on capability: Fictiv covers Instant CAD quoting, SolveSpace covers Constraint solver.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Fictiv and SolveSpace actually diverge.

Attributes where Fictiv and SolveSpace differ
AttributeFictivSolveSpace
Starting priceOn requestFree
Pricing modelquoteOpen source, no licence fee
Free tierNoYes
PlatformsWeb, CloudWindows, macOS, Linux
CategoryManufacturingCAD

Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Fictiv

  • Instant CAD quoting
  • Design for manufacturing feedback
  • Multi-region network
  • Multiple processes
  • Quality documentation
  • Order and revision tracking
  • Bridge to production

Only in SolveSpace

  • Constraint solver
  • Solid modelling
  • Assemblies
  • Export formats
  • Cross-platform
  • Small footprint

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Fictiv

  • An engineering team needing machined prototypes in days without qualifying a machine shop firstnot SolveSpace
  • Moving a part between regions to change landed cost or tariff exposure without re-sourcing a suppliernot SolveSpace
  • Bridge production between prototype tooling and a committed high-volume suppliernot SolveSpace
  • Getting design-for-manufacturing feedback on a part before committing to injection mould toolingnot SolveSpace

SolveSpace

  • Designing 3D printed parts on a machine that cannot run mainstream CADnot Fictiv
  • Teaching constraint-based parametric modelling without buying licences for a classroomnot Fictiv
  • Checking that a mechanical linkage moves as intended before cutting metalnot Fictiv
  • Producing dimensionally accurate STEP or STL output from a small open source toolchainnot Fictiv

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Fictiv

  • This is a manufacturing service, not software you licence, so there is nothing to deploy or own and switching means re-sourcing parts rather than exporting data.
  • A broker sits between you and the shop cutting your part, so at stable production volumes direct sourcing usually beats the platform price and the platform knows it.
  • You do not choose or generally know the specific supplier, which makes process control, supplier audits and traceability harder in regulated or aerospace work.
  • MISUMI completed a $350 million acquisition in June 2025, so roadmap and pricing now answer to a Japanese industrial components group rather than to an independent platform strategy.
  • Instant quotes are geometry-driven and complex or tightly toleranced parts drop into engineer review, so the speed advantage that justified the choice disappears exactly on the parts that are hardest to source.

SolveSpace

  • The in-house geometry kernel fails on complex boolean operations and fillets, and the failure is sometimes silent bad geometry rather than an error message, so models must be checked before export or manufacture.
  • There is no proper drawing and dimensioning workflow, so manufacturing documentation has to be produced in another application.
  • Development is volunteer-led and intermittent; long gaps between releases are normal and there is no support contract available at any price.
  • Assembly-level import of external CAD is very limited, so it does not fit a supply chain that exchanges native or assembly-level models with suppliers.
  • The interface follows its own conventions rather than mainstream CAD ones, so existing SolidWorks or Fusion users spend time unlearning habits for a tool with a lower ceiling.

Pricing, plan by plan

Fictiv

On request
  • Per-part quoting$undefined/month
    • No subscription or platform fee
    • Priced per part by geometry, material, process and quantity
    • Instant quotes for many processes, engineer review for complex parts

SolveSpace

Free
  • SolveSpaceFree
    • Full application under the GPL
    • No seat limit
    • Windows, macOS and Linux builds

Which should you pick?

Choose Fictiv if

  • You need instant cad quoting.
  • You work on Web, Cloud.
  • You also want design for manufacturing feedback.
Fictiv review

Choose SolveSpace if

  • You need constraint solver.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Windows, macOS, Linux.
  • You also want solid modelling.
SolveSpace review

Questions people ask

Is Fictiv or SolveSpace better?
Neither clearly leads. Fictiv starts at On request and SolveSpace at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Fictiv or SolveSpace?
SolveSpace has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for Fictiv and Free for SolveSpace.
Does Fictiv or SolveSpace run on more platforms?
Fictiv runs on Web, Cloud. SolveSpace runs on Windows, macOS, Linux.
Can I use SolveSpace for free?
Yes. SolveSpace has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Fictiv starts at On request.
What is Fictiv best used for?
Fictiv is most often used for an engineering team needing machined prototypes in days without qualifying a machine shop first, moving a part between regions to change landed cost or tariff exposure without re-sourcing a supplier, bridge production between prototype tooling and a committed high-volume supplier, getting design-for-manufacturing feedback on a part before committing to injection mould tooling. Of those, an engineering team needing machined prototypes in days without qualifying a machine shop first and moving a part between regions to change landed cost or tariff exposure without re-sourcing a supplier are not what SolveSpace is typically brought in for.
What can Fictiv do that SolveSpace cannot?
Fictiv covers Instant CAD quoting, Design for manufacturing feedback, Multi-region network, Multiple processes. SolveSpace covers Constraint solver, Solid modelling, Assemblies, Export formats.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Fictiv: Is Fictiv software I can buy?

No. It is an on-demand manufacturing service with a quoting and order management platform. You pay for parts, not for the software.

SolveSpace: Is it really free for commercial work?

Yes. It is released under the GPL with no licence fee and no seat limit. Support is community only.

Fictiv: Is Fictiv still independent?

No. MISUMI Group completed its acquisition, valued at $350 million, in June 2025. Fictiv continues to trade under its own name.

SolveSpace: Can it replace Fusion 360 or SolidWorks?

No. It handles parts and simple assemblies well. Complex geometry, drawings and supply chain interoperability are outside its range.

Fictiv: Do I know which factory makes my part?

Generally not. Fictiv manages a vetted network and allocates work within it, which is a limitation if your quality system requires named and audited suppliers.

SolveSpace: What hardware does it need?

Very little. It runs on old laptops and small Linux machines where mainstream CAD will not start.

Fictiv: Is it cheaper than sourcing directly?

For prototypes and low volumes, usually yes once you count the cost of finding and qualifying a supplier. At stable production volumes, direct sourcing is normally cheaper.

Share

Related pages

More on Fictiv

More on SolveSpace

Keep looking

Other head to heads