Comparing SAM 2 and SAM 3 for Zero-Shot Segmentation of 3D Medical Data

Abstract

Foundation models for promptable segmentation, including SAM, SAM 2, and the recently released SAM 3, have renewed interest in zero-shot segmentation of medical imaging. Although these models perform strongly on natural images, their behavior on medical data remains insufficiently characterized. While SAM 2 is widely used for annotation in 3D medical workflows, SAM 3 introduces a new perception backbone, detector-tracker pipeline, and concept-level prompting that may alter its behavior under spatial prompts. We present the first controlled comparison of SAM 2 and SAM 3 for zero-shot segmentation of 3D medical volumes and videos under purely visual prompting, with concept mechanisms disabled. We assess whether SAM 3 can serve as an out-of-the-box replacement for SAM 2 without customization. We benchmark both models on 16 public datasets (CT, MRI, 3D and cine ultrasound, endoscopy) covering 54 anatomical structures, pathologies, and surgical instruments. Prompts are restricted to the first frame and use four modes: single-click, multi-click, bounding box, and dense mask. This design standardizes preprocessing, prompt placement, propagation rules, and metric computation to disentangle prompt interpretation from propagation. Prompt-frame analysis shows that SAM 3 provides substantially stronger initialization than SAM 2 for click prompting across most structures. In full-volume analysis, SAM 3 retains this advantage for complex, vascular, and soft-tissue anatomies, emerging as the more versatile general-purpose segmenter. While SAM 2 remains competitive for compact, rigid organs under strong spatial guidance, it frequently fails on challenging targets where SAM 3 succeeds. Overall, our results suggest that SAM 3 is the superior default choice for most medical segmentation tasks, particularly those involving sparse user interaction or complex anatomical topology.