ZMIME
Video model comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Veo 3.1 vs Wan v2.5 Preview

Preferred for text to video: Veo 3.1 · Preferred for image to video: Veo 3.1 · Newest: Veo 3.1. Quality scores are blind human-preference votes; specs and prices come from each lab’s listings.

  1. Google

    Veo 3.1

    Released Oct 15, 2025

    • Text to video
    • Image to video
    • Video editing
    • Native audio
    • Arena1,398
    • From$0.20/s
    • Max length8 s
  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Wan v2.5 Preview

    Released Sep 24, 2025Beta

    • Text to video
    • Audio input
    • Arena1,321
    • From—
    • Max length—
  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — At a glance

Where they differ

Quality is the arena score from blind, side-by-side human votes. Price, length and resolution come from each lab’s own listings.

  • Preferred for text to videoVeo 3.1Veo 3.1 1,364 (#12) · Wan v2.5 Preview 1,245 (#25) — blind human votes
  • Preferred for image to videoVeo 3.1Veo 3.1 1,398 (#13) · Wan v2.5 Preview 1,321 (#22) — blind human votes
  • NewestVeo 3.1Veo 3.1 Oct 15, 2025 · Wan v2.5 Preview Sep 24, 2025
  • Widest inputsVeo 3.1Veo 3.1: Text prompts, Reference images, Video · Wan v2.5 Preview: Text prompts, Audio
  • Native audioVeo 3.1Generates an audio track with the video: Veo 3.1 yes · Wan v2.5 Preview no
  • Image to videoVeo 3.1Starts from an uploaded image: Veo 3.1 yes · Wan v2.5 Preview no
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs and apps
  • Most API hostsVeo 3.1Veo 3.1: 3 · Wan v2.5 Preview: 1
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Dashes mean the data is not published.

Veo 3.1 vs Wan v2.5 Preview specifications side by side
SpecificationVeo 3.1GoogleWan v2.5 PreviewAlibaba (Qwen)
Quality (blind human votes)
Text to video arenaElo-style score · higher is better1,364 ±14#12 of 48 · 13,741 votes (best)1,245 ±9#25 of 48 · 36,378 votes
Image to video arenaElo-style score · higher is better1,398 ±10#13 of 48 · 25,116 votes (best)1,321 ±10#22 of 48 · 16,907 votes
Price
Starting price$0.20/s 720p–1080p—
Top price$0.60/s 4K, with audio—
10-second clip$2.00at the starting rate—
How it is billedPer second—
Output
ProducesVideo with soundVideo
Resolutions720p · 1080p · 4K—
Highest resolution4K—
Clip length4, 6 or 8 s—
Longest clip8 s—
SoundOptional—
Frame controlFirst and last frame—
Aspect ratios16:9 · 9:16—
Inputs
Text promptsYesYes
Start image (image to video)YesNo
Video inputYesNo
Audio inputNoYes
Access
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API hosts3 (best)1
ReleasedOct 15, 2025Sep 24, 2025
03 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better, Veo 3.1 or Wan v2.5 Preview?

For text to video, voters prefer Veo 3.1 (Veo 3.1 1,364 (#12) · Wan v2.5 Preview 1,245 (#25)). For image to video, voters prefer Veo 3.1 (Veo 3.1 1,398 (#13) · Wan v2.5 Preview 1,321 (#22)). Arena scores come from blind, side-by-side human votes on the same prompts; when the gap is inside both models’ error margins we call it a tie. Test your own prompts before you commit.

Which is cheaper?

Veo 3.1 costs from $0.20/s (720p–1080p), up to $0.60/s (4K, with audio). A 10-second clip at the lowest rate: Veo 3.1 $2.00. Wan v2.5 Preview has no published per-second price. Prices are list rates and change often; check the lab before budgeting.

How long can the videos be, and at what resolution?

Veo 3.1: 4, 6 or 8 s, 720p / 1080p / 4K; Wan v2.5 Preview: length not published.

What is the difference between Veo 3.1 and Wan v2.5 Preview?

Veo 3.1 is a video model from Google (Oct 15, 2025), taking text prompts, reference images and video and producing video with sound. Wan v2.5 Preview is a video model from Alibaba (Qwen) (Sep 24, 2025), taking text prompts and audio and producing video.

Which is newer?

Veo 3.1 Oct 15, 2025; Wan v2.5 Preview Sep 24, 2025.

Which generates video with sound?

Generates an audio track with the video: Veo 3.1 yes; Wan v2.5 Preview no.

Can I run any of these on my own hardware?

No open weights. Both are available only through APIs and apps.