Seedance 2.5 has been blown up all over the net, but 2.0 fast down to 6 ha is a real scent!

  It's the first time in the history of the world.

In the last few days, AI video racing has gone crazy again!

First on the other side of the ocean, FLUX 3 flashes into the scene, 20 seconds with the original soundtrack, one button straight out, shocking.

National giants have even launched a "down-the-wall" model.

The MiniMax released the H3; byte-only Seedance 2.5, and the opponent offered a "bone-breaking price" to the previous generation of the model; AliWan 3.0 was also quick to announce the announcement.

In just a month and a half, five models were heavily bombed and excited.

How could such a large number of models be chosen for creators and businesses who buy tokens every month?

This month's creative pace has been ruined. Changing your mind, changing your work is better than changing your blood, cutting the past and finding that the water is not enough to cut back?

First, let the strongest one be clear, because it determines the industry's next reference.

Seedance 2.5 can be seen in the foreground, focusing on three areas.

The first is the real feeling. Opening the 2.5, the most immediate feeling is that "AI's oil tank" is gone.

The texture of the skin, the light of the eyes, the microfaces, which were previously recognizable as AI, are now almost invisible.

The second is to follow the instructions, which is where the 2.5 generation is the strongest promotion.

It eats the long prompt of a second-level time-lapse, and you write "Sixth-second shot approaches, twelfth-second reverses", and it works.

The third is that the single generation was extended from 15 seconds to 30 seconds, making it possible to tell a long story.

A 30-second short film, from hiding, watching, trying to escape, being shocked by the sound, to finally looking up and finding the monster stuck on top of his head, completing the entire arc of suspension in one generation.

Seedance 2.5 is really strong, but not everyone who gets it for the first time can feel it right away.

The reason for this is simple: the stronger the model, the more often the advantages are reflected in areas that really need precise control.

Seedance 2.5 truly bridges the gap in its understanding, execution of complex instructions, and image stability and controllability.

For example, in industrial simulation, the model cannot be executed accurately and directly determines whether the content can be delivered.

It's the same with live-action movies and TV shows.

The more complex the demand, the higher the demand for realism, consistency, accuracy and controllability, the more obvious the advantage of 2.5.

But if it's a drama-driven comedy-drama, a screen-short, the demand is less.

This type of content does not necessarily require precise control of every detail, and often creators leave room for the model to participate in the production of footage, performances and images.

So when different creators use 2.5 for the first time, it may feel very different.

It's not that 2.5 isn't strong enough, it's just that its capabilities are stronger and more professional, and it's only when your needs really use those capabilities that its strengths are fully amplified.

So the real question is never "2.5 is good or bad", but "Do you have to use 2.5 for a reason?"

This is what most people really want to do next.

At the same resolution range (near 720P), several models are in the same price range:

I'll start with Seedance 2.0 fast.

It is an efficiency model in the Seedance 2.0 series that targets fast generation and high-frequency generation scenarios, with the goal of keeping the 2.0 effect as high as possible, raising and lowering prices.

Today, with the launch of the all-new flagship 2.5, the price of Seedance 2.0 fast has dropped to 6 Mau per second.

The MiniMax H3 is officially classified as a full-mode generation system.

Its capabilities are focused on rendering and characterization of text and brand identities, the movement of video to video, and scenes such as one-shot design, UI/UX.

Wan 3.0 is up to date. It supports document input, where the document, xls,ppt,pdf is thrown directly into it, and the model can remove the script itself.

This path is "from the material to the finished piece", which is another efficiency for people who do knowledge content, enterprise training, product description.

When it comes to mass production, which of the three models is chosen?

How do you choose these three when it comes to mass production?

There is almost no difference in the single price: 0.5, 0.6, 0.6. The real difference is the number of drawing cards, i.e. "complete book = single price × length × number of drawing cards", and most people only look at the first one.

But it's not cheap to pull a hair twice.

Next, we tested Seedance 2.0 fast, Wan 3.0, and MiniMax H3 for the whole scene.

Upload a cartoon character generated by Midjourney and then throw the same cue words at three AI dolls.

In the woods, a hard man made a proverb: "The next time an insect hits me, I'll go home". As soon as it hit him, an insect fell on his face, and the wind stopped, screaming and running away.

Seven clips of the mirror went through, from the point of impact, side to side, back to back, bouncing down into the crawler pile, shoulder to shoulder through the bushes, and finally aerial photography quickly took place, and people disappeared into the green.

This test is not easy, as a single character needs to pass through seven lenses, and consistency is essential.

It's worth noting that the byte Seedance 2.0 fast is only successful when pulled out once, every time the lens is cut, the clothes are consistent, and the screams are synchronous with the shape of the mouth.

The MiniMax H3 vividly depicts the intimidating details of a character's retreat when he encounters a snake; the AliWan 3.0 rendered the entire environment, with more color and more.

For example, in a science fiction fight scene, a red-haired woman in a giant ring-shaped study hall re-equips her security.

In the instructions given, the movements of the multi-role groups, the spatial consistency under high-speed mirrors, and the physical effects of glass shattering are considered.

In general terms, the images generated by the three AI's are relatively stable, the axis lines of the circular hall are undisturbed, and the color of the white tactical suit is fairly stable.

However, Seedance 2.0 Fast's characters are undoubtedly the most stressful, and there is no character/space collapse in the face of intense spectra.

The following is more interesting, allowing AI to generate a black-pop, cyber-crude rap music video clip.

What is needed is the quality of the fashion magazines that have been scanned: high contrast but not cheap.

This group is one of the most visible gaps in the whole.

If you look at the faces, the three pieces and throw them away, the beauty of the faces, the authenticity of the faces, the mirrors, the steps of the people during the dance, the performance of 2.0 fast is more stable.

The most powerful force is actually the rhythm, the drums hit the most accurately with it, the refraction of the image and the refraction of the music bite together.

After all, these scenes are the most common in short videos, and the content is the most handy in bytes.

Look again at Wan 3.0, which uses the style of the poster, but takes a step further in following the instructions and generates a realistic scenario.

While the MiniMax H3 has a distinctly "dancing feel", the character's movements are small, and most of the dynamic effects are largely done by the cameras.

Then let them use the characters to set up the map as a strict reference, and make a game-loaded CG with an interface.

It's the closest thing to real business life in the entire set, with the UI strictly consistent with text rendering + mechanical deformation + characters.

In the following three videos, the UI is basically perfect in English, and one of the highlights will be in the back-up.

Among them, the MiniMax H3 is the clearest rendering of the page text, with a more realistic game UI.

Seedance 2.0 is strongly consistent in reference generation, showing the process of changing the entire blade in the player's hand, and consistent with the reference graphic details.

Unsurprisingly, in the last few seconds, Wan 3.0 also derived a part of the game world's environment.

In terms of word rendering, the hardest thing for AI is to spell it right and then talk about art style.

In the prologue, it specifies which words appear in each paragraph and where they fall.

For example, in the following 15-second pure-text animation, the Seedance 2.0 fast instruction follows particularly strongly. It perfectly matches the prompter's requirements and precisely controls the time and specific location of the text in each image.

In addition, the 2.0 fast effect is also the best in synchronizing text and background sound.

The MiniMax H3 is stable in this respect, with the full sentence appearing, making it easy to understand the context.

A cyborg turned out to be testing AI.

It requires "gradual transformation", and the model cannot be hidden by cutting mirrors, and each image must grow continuously.

The transformation of the three AI's gives the viewer a full-fledged sense of the "Manufacture of Marvel".

In comparison, Seedance 2.0 fast's intensity and intensity are closer to real-world photosynthesis, with purple energy hitting the skin as a cold, science-fiction theme.

Most importantly, the images are more textured, the environment is more natural, and the expression is more like a real actor.

The mini-Max H3 features almost unchanged, with tight eyebrows and some stiffness.

Advertising is becoming an important "trial stone" in the ability to test video AI.

From image texture, detail control, to lens language and overall completeness, the field of advertising poses extremely high demands on video generation.

In the following tests, reality reflects three different performance parameters.

The MiniMax H3 was the only true foam ring in this test, with a solid dust gap, but the tea-bamboo handle could be seen through the vacuum. The Wan3 action chain is the most complete, but it can be selected as a reference lens with a white, pink and white cap instead of a white cap.

But to deliver, it's best to choose Seedance 2.0 fast, which isn't just about the quality of the cover, it's close enough to see the sparrows, and more importantly, it's about the vividness of the footage.

Finally, test some of the scenes of flying imagination, small but extremely testing AI.

The first was to have three models filming prehistoric concerts with cavemen, singers and dinosaurs.

There is no need to say that AI can make anything happen to you.

Seedance 2.0 fast is the only concert to be played during the daytime. It produces a distinctly more modern style, reasonable stage layout, large scenery, and infectious atmosphere, as if modern people were travelling to prehistoric venues to listen to music.

The other two video scenes have a slightly different feel to it. For example, the Wan 3.0 is directly loaded, which is obviously not the style of the documentary.

And if we compress the 13.7 billion years of history of the known universe to 15 seconds, and cross this extreme time scale, will AI understand?

This test is both scientific and artistic: each of the milestones in the long history of the universe is an artistic expression based on science.

The results of the three models, which one do you like best?

After a round of testing, the most intuitive feeling was that the Seedance 2.0 fast was the most balanced, all-around hexagonal fighter, had the highest single-shot success rate, and was the closest to Seedance 2.0.

• The lowest number of card drawings.Once upon a time.

This is the most tangible advantage of 2.0 fast and the best cost benchmark this time around.

• There are no collapses

Real-time sensing, camera rhythm, audio sync, instruction follow, multi-lens consistency, 2.0 speed are all online.

• It's almost as good as it gets at 2.0.

2.0 fast can be done faster and cheaper, but the graphics quality can be seen closer to version 2.0.

In addition, the MiniMax H3 was recognizable for its styling and detail handling; the overall performance of the Ali Wan was also excellent, but slightly longer than the output waiting time.

The AI video arena is now like the anti-camera lobby of that year, where the ruling party is busy arguing over who is more focused, while the real photographers are taking advantage of the machines to work.

But the audience doesn't care what model you use, they only pay for a good-looking story.

This node, the "best optimization" of AI video, is not the one with the highest score, but the one with the least stress, the most stability, and the best book views.

Seedance 2.0 fast is probably your "best option" right now.

It doesn't exist to make you wonder "AI is great", but to make you sit down and focus on the story itself.