Write one prompt, send it to Veo 3.1, Kling v3 Video, Seedance 2.5 and Wan 3, and watch the four clips side by side. You see how each model handles motion, sound and your subject before you commit credits to the one that suits the job.
Every video model looks great in its own showcase reel. The only way to know which one suits your clip is to give the same prompt to several of them and watch what comes back. On Picasso IA that takes one sitting: Veo 3.1, Kling v3 Video, Seedance 2.5 and Wan 3 all live in the toolkit, so you can run one shot through all four and compare the results side by side.
Video models differ more than image models do. Two of them can read the same sentence and disagree about how fast the camera moves, whether a person walks or glides, how long the clip lasts and whether it arrives with sound. A spec sheet tells you what each model can accept. It does not tell you what each one does with your subject, your lighting and your idea of a good opening second.
Running one shot through several models turns that question into something you can see. Picasso IA lists 121 text-to-video models in a catalog of 502, so there is no shortage of candidates. This page sticks to four that cover different ground: Veo 3.1 from Google, Kling v3 Video, Seedance 2.5 from ByteDance and Wan 3 from Alibaba. Once you know the routine, swapping in any other model from the full catalog takes one click.
Before you test anything, it helps to know which settings the four models actually share. The table comes from the model pages in the catalog, so treat it as a snapshot and check the page of each model for the current options before you plan a test.
| Model | Clip length | Resolution | Inputs beyond the prompt | Audio |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Veo 3.1 | 4, 6 or 8 seconds | 720p or 1080p | Start and end frame, up to 3 reference images | Generated with the clip, on by default |
| Kling v3 Video | Up to 15 seconds | 720p (standard) or 1080p (pro) | Start and end frame, up to 6 scripted shots | Native audio, off by default |
| Seedance 2.5 | Up to 30 seconds | 480p or 720p | Up to 30 reference images, reference video and audio, first and last frame | Generated with the clip, dialogue written in quotes |
| Wan 3 | Up to 30 seconds | 480p, 720p or 1080p | Start image, negative prompt, seed | No audio setting |
Three details decide how fair your test can be. Veo 3.1 is the strictest on length, since it only takes 4, 6 or 8 seconds, so choosing a length from that list keeps the other three on equal terms. The one resolution all four offer is 720p, and the one aspect ratio is 16:9, so those are the sensible defaults for a first round. And Veo 3.1 only accepts reference images at 16:9 and 8 seconds, which means reference-driven tests need their own round with their own rules.
This is the routine that gets you four comparable clips instead of four unrelated ones. Everything happens in the toolkit, where each model is one selection away.
Comparing by feel gives you a favorite. Comparing against a short checklist gives you a reason. Score every clip on the same five points before you read anyone else's opinion, including your own from five minutes ago.
Every generation costs credits, and the price depends on the model and the settings. Resolution, length and audio can each change what one clip costs, so four models in parallel means four separate charges landing together. The toolkit lets you start a new generation while earlier ones are still rendering, and how many can run at once depends on your plan and on whether a generation is paid with credits, so you may sometimes wait for a free slot. New accounts get free credits to try this, and the pricing page has the current plans.
Cost tip: test at 720p and a short length first, pick the one or two models that handle your subject best, and only then rerun the winners at a higher resolution or a longer length. A comparison at maximum settings across every model is the quickest way to spend your credits on clips you were never going to use.
The same logic applies to reruns. A model that misses once is not necessarily the wrong model, but a model that misses the same thing twice on different seeds usually is, and that second run is the only one worth paying for.
A side-by-side test is a sample, not a verdict. One prompt gives each model one roll of the dice, and the same model on the same prompt can return a very different clip the next time. If two models are close, a single run cannot separate them, and a second run costs credits you may prefer to spend on the real project. Seeds do not rescue you either: a seed makes one model repeatable, but the same number means nothing across two different models.
The settings are not perfectly matched, either. Wan 3 has no audio setting, so a sound comparison is only fair between the other three. Seedance 2.5 tops out at 720p in its settings, so a test about fine detail at 1080p leaves it out. A prompt written in the vocabulary one model likes will quietly favor that model, which is why you should write it neutrally and then read the winner with that bias in mind.
It also tells you nothing about a longer piece. A thirty-second ad may need one model for the hero shot and another for the cutaways, and no single comparison clip predicts how they will cut together. If you test with people, use your own face or a fictional character, never a real person who has not agreed to it. For platform-level questions rather than model-level ones, Picasso IA vs Google Veo and Picasso IA vs Kling AI cover those directly.
None of them wins everywhere, and a page that names one winner is guessing. Veo 3.1 is built around short clips with audio and reference images, Kling v3 Video around longer clips and scripted shots, Seedance 2.5 around reference-heavy work and clips up to 30 seconds, and Wan 3 around flexible resolution and length. The best model is the one that handles your subject, and the only way to find it is to run your own prompt.
Use one prompt, one aspect ratio, one resolution and one clip length, and run it through each model in the toolkit. Open the finished clips one after another and score them against the same checklist: motion, subject stability, camera, sound and prompt fidelity. Then repeat the exercise with a start image, because some models behave differently once they have a picture to follow.
Yes. In the toolkit you can send a generation, switch to another model and send again while the first one is still rendering. How many can run in parallel depends on your plan and on whether the generation is paid with credits. If you hit the limit, the next one has to wait for a slot to free up, so plan a four-model test as a short queue rather than a single click.
It costs one generation per model, per run, and the price of each depends on the model and on settings such as resolution, length and audio. That is why a first round at 720p and a short length makes sense, followed by reruns of only the winners. For the numbers that apply to your account, the pricing page is the only place to trust, because anything written here would be out of date quickly.
Veo 3.1 generates audio with the clip and has it on by default. Kling v3 Video can generate native audio, but it is off by default, so switch it on if you want sound in the comparison. Seedance 2.5 generates audio too, including dialogue when you write the spoken lines in quotes. Wan 3 has no audio setting, so leave it out of any test that is partly about sound.
Start at 720p, since all four models offer it and it keeps the first round cheaper. Seedance 2.5 does not list 1080p, so a 1080p round can only include the other three. If your final output has to be 1080p, rerun your top one or two models at that setting before you decide, because detail and motion can read differently at the higher resolution.
Yes, and it is worth doing. Veo 3.1, Kling v3 Video, Seedance 2.5 and Wan 3 all accept a start image, and image-to-video is closer to how many real projects work than text alone. Use a photo you own or a fictional character, and never a real person who has not agreed to it. Our page on turning photos into videos goes deeper on that workflow.
Video models sample their output, so each run starts from a different random point unless you fix a seed, and not every model lets you set one. That is also why one run proves little. If two clips look close, run each model a second time before you declare a winner, and judge the pattern across both runs, not the single best clip.
For a fair first round, no: keep the prompt identical so the differences come from the models. Afterward, adapt it. Seedance 2.5 reads dialogue in quotes and references like image tags, Kling v3 Video can take a scripted list of shots, and Veo 3.1 and Wan 3 both accept a negative prompt. Tuning the winner to its own strengths is a second step, not part of the comparison.
The catalog has 121 text-to-video models and 28 video-editing models, and you can browse them by category in the collection or search the full list. Wan 3, Kling and Seedance each have sibling versions in the catalog, and their model pages list the settings, so you can run the same fair test on any of them.
Ready to see the difference for yourself? Open the Picasso IA toolkit, paste your prompt and send it to the first model.
Choose your language
