597 Background: Automated breast tumor identification and segmentation in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a difficult and crucial area of study in breast cancer research. Artificial intelligence (AI) models are increasingly being developed for automated localization of lesions in imaging studies to facilitate quantitative assessment of features for improved diagnostic, prognostic and predictive performance. Such models have had success in detecting breast cancers in mammography, ultrasound and CT, but few have achieved three-dimensional (3D) volumetric tumor segmentation from breast MRI. The purpose of this study was to apply two state-of-the-art AI – specifically, deep learning (DL) - algorithms to 3D MRI breast cancer data and identify the higher performing algorithm for precise segmentation of breast tumors. Methods: We evaluated pre-treatment, T1 post-gadolinium contrast enhanced breast MRI from 222 patients with known breast cancers (n = 262). Images were split into training (n = 142), validation (n = 36), and hold-out test (n = 44) datasets. Two DL algorithms, U-Net and VAE-UNet, were trained to classify tumors on the training dataset across 1000 epochs. The output for each is a precise localization and segmentation of each tumor at the pixel level from every MRI image. We evaluated the performance of each algorithm using 5-fold cross-validation and testing on the validation and test sets. We calculated a dice accuracy score for each model as the performance comparison metric. Results: The highest dice accuracy score achieved on the validation dataset by generic U-Net was 83.38%, with an average across 1000 epochs of 62.41%. The highest dice accuracy achieved on the validation dataset by VAE-UNet was 82.62%, with an average across epochs of 61.28%. On our test dataset, the highest dice accuracy score achieved by U-Net was 93.09%, with an average across epochs of 66.31%, and the highest accuracy score for VAE-UNet was 90.98%, with average across epochs of 50.47%. Although U-Net appeared to perform slightly better than VAE-Unet for most cases, there were distinct cases where VAE-UNet outperformed U-Net (dice score up to 59% better than U-Net). Subsequent analysis indicated that VAE-UNet preferentially outperforms U-Net for tumors with low sphericity (p = 0.001). Conclusions: Our results suggest that U-Net is well suited for segmenting breast tumors from breast MRI in most cases, but that VAE-UNet outperforms U-Net when the tumor shapes are less spherical. Our findings could inform the choice of DL algorithms in research and clinical endeavors that rely on accurate breast cancer tumor segmentation. In particular, these two tools could be configured to facilitate tumor assessment from breast MRI in the clinical setting for: breast cancer screening in high-risk patient populations, pre-surgical planning, and monitoring of treatment response.