Existing feed-forward 3D Gaussian Splatting methods predict pixel-aligned primitives, leading to a quadratic growth in primitive count as resolution increases. This fundamentally limits their scalability, making high-resolution synthesis such as 4K intractable. We introduce LGTM (Less Gaussians, Texture More), a feed-forward framework that overcomes this resolution scaling barrier. By predicting compact Gaussian primitives coupled with per-primitive textures, LGTM decouples geometric complexity from rendering resolution. This approach enables high-fidelity 4K novel view synthesis without per-scene optimization, a capability previously out of reach for feed-forward methods, all while using significantly fewer Gaussian primitives. Project page: https://yxlao.github.io/lgtm/
Figures & tables
Rendering Resolution
Method
Primitive Resolution
Texture Size
Metrics
Train Memory ( bs=1 )
LPIPS ↓
SSIM ↑
PSNR ↑
1024 × 576
NoPoSplat
1024 × 576
-
0.239
0.716
23.169
61.85 GB
LGTM
512 × 288
2 × 2
0.213
0.816
25.606
20.16 GB
LGTM
256 × 144
4 × 4
0.283
0.762
24.135
16.26 GB
2048 × 1152
NoPoSplat
2048 × 1152
-
✗
✗
✗
OOM
LGTM
512 × 288
4 × 4
0.176
0.810
25.328
21.39 GB
Table 1: LGTM enables high-resolution feed-forward Gaussian splatting. We compare LGTM with NoPoSplat Ye et al. (2025) variants using different primitive resolutions but yielding the same effective output resolution. NoPoSplat fails to train at 2K or higher due to memory and compute limits, whereas LGTM reaches equivalent resolutions with compact geometric primitives and per-primitive texture maps. Training memory reports peak GPU usage with batch size 1, 2 context views, and 4 target views. For inference performance and memory analysis, see Table 4 .
Figure 2: LGTM Architecture. Top : The primitive network fprim takes low-resolution images as input and predicts compact geometric primitives μ , s , r , c . Bottom : The texture network ftexture processes high-resolution images through image patchify and projective mapping networks, and predicts per-primitive texture maps Tα,Tc . This decoupling of geometry and appearance enables LGTM to achieve feed-forward 4K Gaussian splatting with significantly fewer primitives.
Dataset
Method
Render Resolution
Primitive Resolution
Texture Size
Metrics
Baseline
Primitive
LPIPS ↓
SSIM ↑
PSNR ↑
RE10K
NoPoSplat
3DGS
1024 × 576 (1K)
512 × 288
-
0.250
0.823
24.666
2DGS
1024 × 576 (1K)
512 × 288
-
0.225
0.829
24.674
LGTM
1024 × 576 (1K)
512 × 288
2 × 2
0.195
0.847
25.419
NoPoSplat
3DGS
2048 × 1152 (2K)
512 × 288
-
0.257
0.819
24.235
2DGS
2048 × 1152 (2K)
512 × 288
-
0.227
0.823
24.282
Table 2: Novel view synthesis results under two-view setting. Performance of LGTM over NoPoSplat and DepthSplat across rendering resolutions and datasets. For 4K resolution, we use 4096 × 2304 for NoPoSplat and 3840 × 2048 for DepthSplat due to the requirements of their backbone networks.
Figure 3: Qualitative comparison in the two-view setting. Evaluated on the DL3DV dataset at 4K resolution. Best viewed in color and zoomed in.
Inputs
Method
Render Resolution
Primitive Resolution
Texture Size
Metrics
Baseline
Primitive
LPIPS ↓
SSIM ↑
PSNR ↑
Single-view
Flash3D
3DGS
1024 × 576 (1K)
512 × 288
-
0.274
0.672
21.353
2DGS
1024 × 576 (1K)
512 × 288
-
0.267
0.676
21.447
LGTM
1024 × 576 (1K)
512 × 288
2 × 2
0.215
0.708
21.910
Flash3D
3DGS
2048 × 1152 (2K)
512 × 288
-
0.368
0.643
19.911
2DGS
2048 × 1152 (2K)
512 × 288
-
0.358
0.653
20.276
Table 3: Single-view and multi-view novel view synthesis results. Comparison of LGTM with Flash3D Szymanowicz et al. (2025) and VGGT Wang et al. (2025a) baselines across different view settings and resolutions on DL3DV dataset.
Figure 4: Qualitative comparison in the single-view setting. We re-train Flash3D on DL3DV with the same number of geometric primitives (512 × 288) for 3DGS, 2DGS, and LGTM.
Method
Primitive Resolution
Texture Size
Render Resolution
Peak GPU Memory (GB)
Network Fwd. Time (ms)
Render Time (ms)
Total Time (ms)
①
NoPoSplat 3DGS
512 × 288
-
512 × 288
3.06
110.37
3.81
114.18
②
NoPoSplat 2DGS
512 × 288
-
512 × 288
3.06
112.70
6.43
119.13
③
LGTM
512 × 288
2 × 2
1024 × 576
4.33
132.06
7.70
139.76
④
LGTM
512 × 288
4 × 4
2048 × 1152
4.60
136.14
14.26
150.40
⑤
LGTM
512 × 288
8 × 8
4096 × 2304
5.51
142.28
32.82
175.10
Table 4: Inference time and memory benchmark. LGTM is highly efficient when scaling up to high resolutions: compared to the NoPoSplat 512 × 288 2DGS (②), the LGTM 4096 × 2304 model (⑤) represents a 64 × increase in pixels, yet requires only 1.80 × the peak memory and 1.47 × the total time. For an analysis of training memory requirements, see Table 1 .
Method
LPIPS ↓
SSIM ↑
PSNR ↑
①
NoPoSplat (3DGS)
0.371
0.583
16.964
②
+ High-res retrain (2DGS)
0.256
0.731
23.502
③
+ Image patchify only
0.199
0.782
24.673
④
+ Texture color
0.189
0.806
25.314
⑤
+ Texture alpha (full model)
0.176
0.810
25.328
Table 5: Ablation study on LGTM components. We start from the NoPoSplat baseline and progressively integrate components of LGTM, evaluated on DL3DV at 2K resolution. All models operate on 512 × 288 primitives. The baseline is trained on low-resolution and evaluated at 2K. Subsequent versions are trained with high-resolution supervision.
Figure 5: Qualitative results of the ablation study. Each image shows the progressive improvement as components of LGTM are added to the NoPoSplat baseline. The full model produces renderings that are visibly closer to the ground truth.
Appendix figures & tables6 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 6: Effects of high-resolution re-training.
Figure 7: Unbounded bilinear texture sampling. Our sampling method uses border clamping to handle out-of-bounds coordinates, allowing texture information to extend beyond the primitive boundary. This provides smoother transitions and better coverage compared to bounded sampling approaches that use zero-padding for out-of-bounds areas.
Figure 8: Qualitative comparison across different input view gaps. Each row shows context frame gaps of 10, 20, 30, and 40 frames. LGTM consistently produces sharper details and fewer artifacts.
Context view gap
Method
LPIPS ↓
SSIM ↑
PSNR ↑
10
NoPoSplat
0.322
0.737
22.198
NoPoSplat + LGTM
0.200
0.803
24.489
20
NoPoSplat
0.366
0.722
20.732
NoPoSplat + LGTM
0.258
0.765
22.159
30
NoPoSplat
0.413
0.709
19.430
NoPoSplat + LGTM
0.323
0.730
20.123
Appendix
Table 6: Quantitative comparison across different input view gaps. LGTM consistently outperforms the baseline across all gaps (10, 20, 30, 40 frames), demonstrating robustness to larger viewpoint differences.
Figure 9: Comparing LGTM to per-scene optimization. Top: Per-scene optimization overfits to context views with degraded performance on middle frames. DepthSplat + LGTM maintains stable quality across all frames. Bottom: Target frame #10. While both achieve similar sharpness in the center, LGTM produces sharper details with fewer artifacts toward the edges.
Method
Per-Scene Optimization
DepthSplat + LGTM (Ours)
Frames for COLMAP
{0, 1, 2, …, 20}
-
Context views (optimization)
{0, 20}
{0, 20}
Target views (evaluation)
{1, 2, 3, …, 19}
{1, 2, 3, …, 19}
PSNR ↑
21.75
27.99
SSIM ↑
0.78
0.88
LPIPS ↓
0.21
0.15
Appendix
Table 7: Comparison with per-scene optimization. DepthSplat + LGTM outperforms per-scene optimized 3DGS while being orders of magnitude faster.
3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) achieves high-quality novel-view synthesis by optimizing freely placed primitives in 3D and adaptively densifying them in under-reconstructed regions. However, this scene-adaptive capacity allocation is largely lost in existing feed-forward 3DGS methods, which commonly regress Gaussians at input pixels and lift them along camera rays. Such pixel-aligned formulations make the number and placement of primitives depend on image resolution and input viewpoints rather than scene complexity, resulting in dense and often redundant Gaussian sets. We present ATSplat, a feed-forward 3DGS framework that restores the adaptive allocation capability of 3DGS optimization through Adaptive 3D Tokens. ATSplat first lifts coarse patch-level depth and camera cues into sparse 3D anchor tokens, forming a compact scaffold of the scene. Each token is then regressed into local Gaussians with learnable 3D offsets, decoupling primitive placement from input image grids. An Adaptive Token Expansion module predicts a token-level uncertainty score, supervised by rendering error maps, and selectively expands high-uncertainty tokens through learnable expansion layers. This sparse-to-adaptive formulation enables ATSplat to concentrate primitives in challenging regions while maintaining a compact representation. Experiments on two representative datasets, RealEstate10K and DL3DV, show that ATSplat achieves state-of-the-art rendering quality while reducing the number of Gaussians by more than 5.7× compared with dense feed-forward 3DGS methods. From 12 input images at 512×960 resolution, ATSplat completes reconstruction in less than a second using a single commercial GPU, and renders high-quality novel views at 1136 FPS (512×960) with only 311K Gaussians.
In Cho, Jeonghwan Cho, Mijin Yoo +2
Yonsei University, South Korea · National University of Singapore, Singapore
Gaussian Splatting has enabled real-time novel view synthesis, but its tightly coupled geometry and appearance representation often require a large number of primitives to reproduce high-frequency texture details, leading to substantial memory and optimization costs. Recent textured 2D Gaussian methods alleviate this limitation by attaching texture maps to Gaussian primitives. However, bridging the fundamental structural gap between discrete Gaussians and continuous 2D grids requires complex parameterizations that introduce severe computational overhead. This overhead fundamentally compromises the original efficiency of Gaussian Splatting, making the balance between detailed texturing and computational agility an unresolved challenge. To address these challenges, we propose LiteTex-GS, a fast and lightweight texturing framework for Gaussian Splatting. Our method initializes an extremely compact representation, assigning minimal local texture to each Gaussian and progressively allocates higher resolution only to primitives with significant reconstruction errors. To maintain a streamlined geometric scaffold, we introduce a contribution- and area-aware pruning strategy that eliminates low-utility Gaussians. Furthermore, to mitigate the gradient dilution caused by texture upsampling, we design a resolution-aware update rule that preserves rapid and stable convergence. Extensive experiments on standard novel view synthesis benchmarks demonstrate that our method achieves competitive or superior rendering quality while using substantially fewer parameters and less training time than existing textured Gaussian baselines.
Zhiwei Li, Yijia Guo, Yishi Lu +4
School of Mathematics and Computer Science, Nanchang University · State Key Laboratory of Multimedia Information Processing, School of Computer Science, Peking University · Henan University +4
Feed-forward 3D Gaussian Splatting enables efficient novel-view synthesis without per-scene optimization, but most existing methods assume a fixed set of context views and process them jointly. This limits their applicability to online scenarios where calibrated views arrive sequentially and the scene must be updated causally. We present StreamSplat, a streaming feed-forward 3DGS framework that incrementally maintains a persistent geometry-grounded scene state and decodes it into renderable 3D Gaussians after each input chunk. StreamSplat centers on a Voxel-Aligned Causal Cache (VACC), which stores historical 3D tokens in a memory-bounded voxel structure so that memory grows with explored scene geometry rather than stream length. To better reuse history during causal prediction, we introduce History-Projected Depth Anchoring (HPDA) to project cached geometry as depth guidance for current cost-volume estimation, and Cache-Guided Feature Injection (CGFI) to inject cached latent evidence into Gaussian-token regression. Experiments on DL3DV, RealEstate10K, and ScanNet show that StreamSplat remains competitive with state-of-the-art feed-forward 3DGS methods under sparse causal inputs, despite not using future views or full-scene context. More importantly, it scales to long input streams with 256, 512, and 1024 views where fixed-view baselines run out of memory, yielding sustained improvements in novel-view synthesis quality as more observations arrive. The code will be made publicly available upon acceptance.