AI video model comparison
Seedance 2.0 vs Wan 3.0
Seedance 2.0 is 10% cheaper (price per second at 720p: Seedance 2.0 $0.23/s vs Wan 3.0 $0.25/s). Seedance 2.0 has a higher top resolution. Wan 3.0 has the cheapest clip, faster renders, longer clips and more reference images.
| Price | ||
|---|---|---|
| Cheapest second | $0.10/s (best) | $0.13/s |
| Per second at 480p | $0.10/s (best) | $0.13/s |
| Per second at 720p | $0.23/s (best) | $0.25/s |
| Per second at 1080p | $0.56/s | $0.51/s (best) |
| Per second at 4K | $1.17/s | Not offered |
| Cheapest clip | $0.41 | $0.26 (best) |
| A 5-second clip at 720p | $1.15 (best) | $1.28 |
| A 10-second clip at 1080p | $5.65 | $5.10 (best) |
| Speed and length | ||
| Render time | ~2–7 min | ~2–7 min (best) |
| Longest clip | 15s | 30s (best) |
| Clip lengths | 4–15s | 2–30s |
| Output | ||
| Top resolution | 4K (best) | 1080P |
| Frames | 9:16 · 16:9 · 1:1 · 4:3 · 3:4 · 21:9 | 16:9 · 4:3 · 1:1 · 3:4 · 9:16 |
| Sound | Native | Native |
| Inputs | ||
| Takes | 9Text · 9 images · 1 video · audio | 10Text · 10 images · 1 video · audio |
| Reference images | Up to 9 | Up to 10 (best) |
| Needs | A prompt | A prompt |
| What it does | ||
| Can do | Text → videoImage → videoFirst + last frameMulti-referenceVideo → videoAudio-driven | Text → videoImage → videoFirst + last frameMulti-referenceVideo → videoAudio-driven |
| Good for | Cinematic scenes · Multi-reference · Product films | Value renders · Open ecosystem · Experimentation |
| Settings you control | Frame · Length · Mode · Audio · Attachment role · Per-attachment roles · Negative prompt · Resolution · Return last frame · Seed · Watermark | Frame · Audio · Length · Document · Attachment role · Per-attachment roles · Web page · Expand prompt · Resolution · Seed · Watermark |
Same prompt, side by side
UGC selfie · the same prompt on every model
“A woman in her late twenties talks straight into her phone camera in a bright kitchen, handheld selfie framing, natural window light, she smiles and gestures mid-sentence, casual creator energy, no on-screen captions”
Product shot · the same prompt on every model
“Cinematic product shot: a matte black wireless earbud case turns slowly on a dark reflective surface, a single warm rim light sweeps across it, macro lens, shallow depth of field, slow push-in, plain unbranded case”
Which should you choose?
Choose Seedance 2.0 if you want
- a lower price per second at 720p
- a higher top resolution
- cinematic scenes
- multi-reference
Choose Wan 3.0 if you want
- the cheapest clip
- faster renders
- longer clips
- more reference images
- value renders
- open ecosystem
More from each model
Seedance 2.0
Compare with others
Seedance 2.0 vs …
Seedance 2.0 vs Seedance 2.5
Seedance 2.0 vs Kling 3.0
Seedance 2.0 vs Veo 3.1
Seedance 2.0 vs Wan 3.0 Prime
Seedance 2.0 vs Seedance 2.0 Fast
Seedance 2.0 vs MiniMax H3
Wan 3.0 vs Kling O1
Wan 3.0 vs Seedance 2.0 MiniHow we compare
- Prices come from the live catalog at the pay-as-you-go rate. The quote before you generate is binding. Plans and packs
- Render times are the catalog’s own estimate for one render.
- Every clip and image on this page was rendered on OpenClips.
Questions
Seedance 2.0 vs Wan 3.0: questions
Seedance 2.0 costs the least here (price per second at 720p). Seedance 2.0: $0.23/s. Wan 3.0: $0.25/s. Prices are at the pay-as-you-go rate. The quote before you generate is binding.
Wan 3.0 is the fastest here. Seedance 2.0 takes ~2–7 min. Wan 3.0 takes ~2–7 min.
Seedance 2.0 and Wan 3.0 take a still as the first frame or a reference.
Seedance 2.0 makes up to 15 seconds. Wan 3.0 makes up to 30 seconds.
Seedance 2.0 and Wan 3.0 render native audio with the picture.