Modern thermal-hydraulics (TH) systems analysis codes are increasingly being updated to include three-dimensional (3D) TH components towards capturing the complex flow phenomena in large components of light water reactors (LWRs). These are becoming increasingly popular for modelling reactor pressure vessels and cores since they potentially offer a more realistic representation of, for example, the effects of asymmetric loop flows and injection, which cannot be captured using traditional multi-channel models. Experience suggests, however, there may be unexpected side effects of upgrading from traditional multi-channel models. In this paper, we present comparative results demonstrating our experiences in switching to 3D components using the US-NRC system code TRACE. We present a series of studies in which 1D and 3D nodalisations are compared for representative PWR loss-of-coolant-accident (LOCA) scenarios. We see a clear trend for many of the LOCA scenarios considered. In particular, the peak cladding temperature (PCT) for 3D nodalisations is significantly lower than for traditional multi-channel models in many cases. Counter current flow limitation (CCFL) at the core upper tie plate appears to be one of the driving phenomena for many of the observed differences. This trend is, however, not universal; For a surge line break in the large scale test facility (LSTF), heterogeneities in the core upper tie plate lead to hot regions in the core, which are not captured in the multi-channel model. For large PWR cores, 3D nodalisations appear to represent the reality more closely. For smaller cross-sections, however, the validity of the TRACE's CCFL prediction for 3D nodalisations is questionable. Specific guidelines are therefore needed to help TRACE users select the most appropriate 3D nodalisation for different geometries.