Quick Comparison
Feature | Wan 2.5 | Veo 3 |
---|---|---|
Max Resolution | 1080p | 4K (2160p) |
Frame Rate | 24 FPS | 24/30 FPS |
Max Length | 10 seconds | 60+ seconds |
Audio Sync | Excellent | Limited |
T2V Mode | Yes | Yes |
I2V Mode | Yes | Yes |
Public Availability | Yes (multiple platforms) | Limited access |
Pricing | $0.05-0.15/s | Not publicly disclosed |
Detailed Analysis
📹 Resolution & Quality
Wan 2.5
Maxes out at 1080p (Full HD) at 24 FPS. Excellent quality for web, social media, and most professional use cases. Cinematic 24 FPS provides natural motion blur.
Veo 3
Supports up to 4K (2160p) resolution with variable frame rates (24/30 FPS). Significantly higher quality ceiling for broadcast and cinema applications.
🎤 Audio Sync & Lip Movement
Wan 2.5
Excellent audio-sync is a core feature. Generates realistic lip movements matched to audio input. Works with dialogue, singing, and vocals across multiple languages.
Veo 3
Audio-sync capabilities are limited. Primarily focused on visual generation. Lip-sync features not emphasized in public documentation.
🌐 Availability & Access
Wan 2.5
Widely available through multiple platforms: Fal.ai, WaveSpeed, AIMLAPI, and others. Transparent pricing, easy API access, no waitlists.
Veo 3
Limited public access. Primarily available through Google's Vertex AI or select partners. May require enterprise agreements or waitlist approval.
🏆 Verdict
Choose Wan 2.5 if: You need audio-synced talking videos, immediate access, clear pricing, and 1080p is sufficient for your needs (social media, web, most marketing).
Choose Veo 3 if: You require 4K resolution, longer video lengths (60s+), have enterprise access to Google's AI services, and don't prioritize audio-sync.
For most creators: Wan 2.5 is the better choice today due to availability, pricing transparency, and superior audio-sync capabilities.