The selection of the printing parameters in the laser powder bed fusion process can be improved by high-fidelity simulations of the fluid flow in the melt pool (MP). At this scale, laser heating, solid-liquid phase change, surface tension and evaporation effects drive the fluid dynamics and the energy transport. The resulting MP shape and thermal history control the quality of the part. Predictions of the MP dynamics using numerical simulations enable better process parameters selection. High-fidelity solvers typically model the driving phenomena at the liquid-gas interface. However, the current literature lacks studies assessing their accuracy. This problem comes from three main reasons. First, analytical solutions are only available for simplified configurations. Second, it is challenging to reach mesh-independent solutions for 3D MP flows. Third, there is a lack of extensive validation database for which the physical properties and process parameters are known with a high degree of fidelity. This work presents a reproducible, quantitative benchmark assessing the spatial accuracy of different numerical frameworks using code-to-code comparison. It considers the static irradiation of a Ti-6Al-4V bare plate, based on the experimental works of Cunningham et al. [1] and Simonds et al. [2]. It provides a complete description of the selected physical properties to ensure reproducibility and studies the spatial convergence in 1D, 2D and 3D of geometric metrics such as the MP and vapor depression depths. Preliminary results of two independent, finite element, solvers using diffuse interface models show spatially converged solutions in good agreement for the 1D and 2D configurations [3]. This presentation extends the preliminary study to consider the 3D configuration as well as additional solvers using sharp formulations of the pressure jump and/or temperature change at the interface due to the effects of the heating, surface tension, and evaporation. [1] R. Cunningham, C. Zhao, et al., “Keyhole threshold and morphology in laser melting revealed by ultrahigh-speed x-ray imaging,” Science, vol. 363, no. 6429, Feb. 2019. [2] B. J. Simonds, et al., “The causal relationship between between melt pool geometry and energy absorption measured in real time during laser-based manufacturing,” Applied Materials Today, vol. 23, Jun. 2021. [3] H. Papillon-Laroche, et al., “Quantitative benchmark for laser powder bed fusion melt pool scale models,” 2024, 16th WCCM.