Skip to content
Model Pareto

Wan 3.0 vs Wan 2.7 0612

In video generation, Wan 3.0 scores 93.8 and Wan 2.7 0612 60.3 on the 0–100 quality scale. Wan 3.0 costs 1.3× as much as Wan 2.7 0612 ($0.20 vs $0.15 per second of 1080p video).
Wan 3.0Wan 2.7 0612
Focus

Video generation: quality vs price

Compared models are ringed; the other 32 ranked here are greyed.

Lower price is better. Pareto frontier: Hailuo 2.3, Grok Imagine Video, HiDream-O1-Video, Gemini Omni Flash. 4 models are not plotted: Muse Video, MAGI-2 Preview, Bach-1.0 Preview, Cosmos3-Super-Image2Video-4Step.

4 models with no price data — shown in the strip at the left edge

Muse Video, MAGI-2 Preview, Bach-1.0 Preview, Cosmos3-Super-Image2Video-4Step

  • Best-value frontier (nothing is both cheaper and better)
  • Evidencestrong → weak
  • Estimated from other categories
  • Wan 3.0
    Quality
    93.8
    Rank
    #3/34
    Price
    $0.20/s
    Speed
    —

    vs Wan 2.7 0612: +33.5 quality · 1.3× price

  • Wan 2.7 0612
    Quality
    60.3
    Rank
    #14/34
    Price
    $0.15/s
    Speed
    —

    vs Wan 3.0: −33.5 quality · 0.75× price

Overview

Lab
Alibaba Qwen
Alibaba Qwen
Released
Aug 19, 2026
Jun 12, 2026
Weights
Proprietary
Proprietary
Price per second
1080p
$0.20
$0.15Best

Quality by category

0–100 within each category (100 = best tracked model). Rank is among all models ranked there. Click a row to focus it.

93.8±4.1Best
#3/34Verified
60.3±6.7
#14/34Verified

Video generation benchmarks

Rank among models with a published score, and the leaderboard around each model. ~ italic = no published score, estimated from related benchmarks.

VBench
day 0
—
—