Lightning infill uses the least filament of any infill pattern available in modern slicers. It can reduce material usage by 50% or more compared to other infill options at the same density setting, and up to 90% less than a solid model. But lightning isn’t always the right choice, so understanding how the most efficient patterns compare will help you pick the best one for your specific print.
Lightning Infill: The Most Efficient Option
Lightning infill works differently from every other pattern. Instead of filling the interior of your model with a repeating geometric structure, it only generates the minimum material needed to support top surfaces. The result looks like a branching tree inside your print, with thin tendrils reaching up to hold overhanging areas in place. Everywhere else, the interior stays hollow.
This approach saves more material than any other infill type, including support cubic, which was previously considered the most filament-efficient pattern. Lightning is available in Cura and PrusaSlicer (where it’s listed under the infill options). The tradeoff is significant: lightning provides almost no internal strength. It’s ideal for decorative models, display pieces, and prototypes where you don’t need the part to bear any load. If someone picks up your print and squeezes it, the walls will flex inward with very little resistance.
Other Low-Filament Patterns Worth Considering
If you need some structural integrity but still want to minimize filament, several patterns offer a good balance.
Lines (rectilinear) and zigzag are the next most filament-efficient options. They print in long, continuous paths with few direction changes, which also makes them the fastest patterns available. Strength is low since the lines don’t interlock, but they’re a step up from lightning when you need a bit more rigidity.
Support cubic uses less material and print time than most traditional patterns. Prusa Research rates its material consumption and print time as the lowest among standard geometric infills. It creates a cubic lattice that shifts orientation to concentrate support where it’s needed most.
Adaptive cubic takes a different approach by varying the density throughout the model. Near the walls and top surfaces, the infill is denser. Deep inside the model where support isn’t critical, it thins out. This uses roughly 25% less filament than standard rectilinear infill at the same density setting, while maintaining better structural performance than lightning or lines.
Gyroid and cubic both rate as “high” in filament efficiency while providing strong, balanced structural support. Gyroid is particularly popular because it distributes forces evenly in all directions and prints faster than honeycomb, which offers similar strength but takes longer due to its complex toolpath.
How Infill Density Matters More Than Pattern
Choosing an efficient pattern is only half the equation. Dropping your infill density from 20% to 10% will save far more filament than switching from grid to gyroid at the same percentage. For non-functional prints, 5-10% infill with lightning or lines uses a fraction of the material that most people default to. For functional parts, 15-20% with cubic or gyroid is often plenty.
Most slicers default to somewhere around 20% infill density. Before optimizing your pattern choice, check whether you actually need that much. Many prints work fine at 10-15%, especially with a pattern that distributes loads well.
The Line Multiplier Trick
There’s a lesser-known setting that can help you use less filament while maintaining strength: the infill line multiplier. Research on hollow-section PLA parts found that using a line multiplier of 2 at 25% infill density produced nearly the same tensile strength as a standard single-line print at 50% density. Both configurations weighed the same (5.5 grams), but the doubled-line version at lower density printed faster.
In practical terms, this means you can sometimes cut your infill percentage in half, double the line multiplier, and end up with comparable strength at the same weight but with reduced print time. This works because thicker infill lines resist buckling better than thin, widely spaced ones. The setting is available in Cura as “Infill Line Multiplier” and behaves similarly in other slicers under related names.
Choosing the Right Pattern for Your Print
The best pattern depends entirely on what the print needs to do:
- Display models and decorations: Lightning at 5-10%. You’ll use the absolute minimum filament and print fastest.
- Quick prototypes for fit-checking: Lines or zigzag at 10-15%. Fast, cheap, and rigid enough to handle.
- Functional parts under load: Gyroid or cubic at 15-20%. These give you strong, balanced support without wasting material on overly dense fills.
- Lightweight parts needing high strength (drone frames, brackets): Honeycomb or gyroid at 20-25%. Honeycomb is the classic choice here, though it prints slower than gyroid with similar results.
If your only goal is saving filament and you don’t care about strength, lightning wins by a wide margin. For everything else, pair an efficient pattern like gyroid or adaptive cubic with the lowest density that meets your strength requirements, and you’ll strike the best balance between material savings and a usable part.