Wan 3.0 Prime vs Seedance 2.0 Mini
These two cost exactly the same per clip, both animate a start image, and both score within a point of each other on the blind index. Wan 3.0 Prime wins the pair on everything that is not price: double the length ceiling, reference images, a shorter median and a better completion record.
Both engines run in the WowMade video studio, so every number below comes from the same production queue rather than from either vendor. Blind quality index v0.1, run 2026-09-02; speed and completion measured over a rolling 60-day window.
The numbers
| Measure | Wan 3.0 Prime | Seedance 2.0 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| Blind quality index (0–100) | 79 | 79 |
| Median time, submit to finished clip | 96 s | 254 s |
| p90 time | 246 s | 497 s |
| Completion rate | 96% | 94% |
| Credits, 5 s at 720p | 10 | 10 |
| ≈ USD at the best credit rate | $1.90 | $1.90 |
| Longest single clip | 30 s | 15 s |
| Native audio | Yes | Yes |
| Starts from text alone | No — image required | No — image required |
| Production renders behind these numbers | 1,341 | 266 |
USD is derived at the Premium credit rate of $0.19 per credit and is shown for comparison only. Full prices and the rate every figure derives from are on pricing details.
The same numbers, seen
Five views of the table above: how long the wait actually feels, how wide the slow tail runs, where these two sit among every engine we measure, how much blind score each credit buys, and what a job of your size costs on each.
A finished clip is the flag. Median means half of all runs land faster than this, half slower.
Engines without a blind score yet are not plotted. Hover a grey dot for its name.
Higher is more blind-index score per credit spent. Built from a v0.1 index, so it inherits that index’s uncertainty — bars within a few percent of each other are not ranked, and an engine with no score is absent rather than last.
At 9 runs, Wan 3.0 Prime costs $0.00 less than Seedance 2.0 Mini. A Start plan at $25 carries 75 credits, Go $60 carries 250, Premium $95 carries 500. Plans renew monthly until cancelled and can be cancelled online at any time.
The same prompt, on both
A blind score is a number, not a picture, and at this end of the index the numbers sit close enough that the picture is the more useful of the two. Here is one brief run on each engine, at its own settings.
AI generated with Wan 3.0 Prime
AI generated with Seedance 2.0 Mini
Both were run from the one prompt every engine on the site is given, each at its own settings — the same sample each shows on its own model page. Nothing is retouched and nothing is cherry-picked. Paste it into the studio and you can run it yourself:
A colossal whale carved from liquid mercury breaches through a sea of floating obsidian shards, molten gold light pouring from the seams in its hide, slow orbital camera, volumetric god rays, drifting embers, hyper-detailed, cinematic, no people
Both files are AI-generated and carry a signed C2PA content credential saying so. Anyone can check either one on verify.
What each one is
Wan 3.0 Prime
Image-to-video with reference-image guidance, native audio, up to 1080p and 30 seconds.
Alibaba · 1,341 production renders measured · scored over 2 judged prompts
Seedance 2.0 Mini
Most affordable Seedance tier. Native audio, last-frame control, output up to 4K.
ByteDance · 266 production renders measured · scored over 2 judged prompts
Identical price, identical entry mode, near-identical score — on paper this pair looks like a coin toss, and it is the one comparison in the catalogue where the measurement points clearly in one direction anyway.
Wan 3.0 Prime reaches 30 seconds against 15, takes reference images to hold a subject steady across a clip, comes back sooner at the median and completes a higher share of what it starts. None of those is a small advantage, and none of them costs anything extra here.
The case for Mini is narrower than it first looks, and it is mostly about family. Prompts and settings move cleanly between Seedance tiers, so if the rest of your work sits on Seedance, staying inside that family can be worth more in practice than any single row in the table.
How to read the table
Median is the middle time across the window, so half of all runs land faster than the figure shown. p90 is the slow tail: nine runs in ten finish inside it. The gap between the two is the number to watch when you are planning a session — Wan 3.0 Prime spreads from 96 s to 246 s, Seedance 2.0 Mini from 254 s to 497 s. A wide spread means the queue, not the model, decides your afternoon.
Completion rate is the share of submitted runs that finished. It is not a quality measure — a run can complete and still be wrong for you — but a low rate means retries, and retries cost credits. Quality is a blind score out of 100 and is only comparable inside this index; it is not a vendor benchmark and it is not comparable to anyone else’s number.
What the numbers do not say
When two engines are this close on score, the number that should decide it is the one with more traffic behind it. Read both scores as a band rather than a ranking, and let the capability rows do the work.
Where each one wins
Choose Wan 3.0 Prime when
- You want the longer ceiling, the reference-image guidance, or both — at the same price.
- You want the shorter median wait and the stronger completion record.
- You are holding one subject steady across several clips and want references doing that job.
Choose Seedance 2.0 Mini when
- The rest of your work is already on Seedance and you want prompts that carry across without rewriting.
- The shot is short and simple enough that the 15-second ceiling is irrelevant.
- You want to stay within one engine family for consistency between shots in a set.
What a real job costs
Six finished clips, allowing one reject in three — 9 runs:
- Wan 3.0 Prime — 90 credits, about $17.10, roughly 14 minutes of queue at the median.
- Seedance 2.0 Mini — 90 credits, about $17.10, roughly 38 minutes of queue at the median.
Credits come from a WowMade plan: Start at $25, Go at $60 or Premium at $95 per month. Plans renew monthly until cancelled and can be cancelled online at any time; new purchases are processed by Whop. The full price list is on pricing details.
How these numbers were produced
Quality is the WowMade Video Quality Index v0.1, run 2026-09-02: every engine runs the same prompts at matched settings and the results are scored blind. Speed and completion rate are production telemetry over a rolling 60-day window, not a lab test — they include queue time, because that is what you actually wait. Every engine we measure, including the ones not on this page, is published on the video model index.
Every clip generated here is AI-generated and carries a signed C2PA content credential saying so. Anyone can check a file on verify.
Questions
Do Wan 3.0 Prime and Seedance 2.0 Mini cost the same?
Yes. Both sit at the same credit cost for a five-second clip at the comparison tier, which is why the rest of the table decides this pair rather than the price row.
Can either one start from text?
No. Both are image-to-video engines and need a start frame. If you are beginning from a written idea, generate an image first or choose an engine that accepts a prompt on its own.
Which produces better clips?
The blind index puts them within a point of each other, which is inside the noise of a v0.1 run, so neither can be called better on output from the published data.
What can Wan 3.0 Prime do that Mini cannot?
Run to 30 seconds rather than 15, and take reference images that keep a subject consistent across a clip. Both are capabilities Mini does not offer at any price.
Why choose Mini at all?
Mainly for family consistency. If your other shots are on Seedance engines, prompts and settings carry across without rewriting, which can matter more in a set than any single row of the comparison.