Skip to main content

Head-to-head comparison

GPT Image 1.5 vs. Seedream 5.0 Pro

Compare shared capability tests, arena scores with documented retrieval dates, task-specific image pricing, and verified specifications. Research benchmarks, preference arenas, and our n = 1 samples remain separate.

shared result series
16
shared sample prompts
4
latest arena retrieval
2026-08-26

Change image model selection

Specifications and cost

General specifications and task-specific pricing

A model can have one price for generating new images and another for editing. Prices therefore remain tied to the corresponding arena configuration.

Specifications and pricing for GPT Image 1.5 and Seedream 5.0 Pro
AttributeGPT Image 1.5Seedream 5.0 Pro
ProviderOpenAIByteDance
ReleasedDecember 2025July 2026
AccessAPI, Web appAPI, Web app
LifecycleMarked as deprecated by OpenAI Status sourceNo separate lifecycle notice
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
ParametersNot publishedNot published
Maximum output1,536 × 1,024 pixels2K
Arena configurationHighNo separate configuration named
Text-to-image price$133 per 1,000 images$90 per 1,000 images
Editing price$133 per 1,000 images$90 per 1,000 images
Technical sourceModel sourceVerified 2026-08-15Model sourceVerified 2026-08-15
GPT Image 1.5Seedream 5.0 Pro
Text to Image ArenaUSD per 1,000 images at 1,024 × 1,024 pixels
GPT Image 1.5$133
Seedream 5.0 ProLower price$90
Image Editing ArenaUSD per 1,000 images at 1,024 × 1,024 pixels
GPT Image 1.5$133
Seedream 5.0 ProLower price$90

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Prompt adherence and specialist tests

Shared capability benchmarks

Every matchup includes the same four Gradually sample tasks. For each task, one archived first output from every model is ranked in three differently ordered, model-blind passes. The published 0-100 value normalizes the mean rank. It must still be read as an n = 1 sample per model. No exact shared result from the integrated research benchmarks is available for this pair.

GPT Image 1.5Seedream 5.0 Pro
Gradually sample test: Typography and layoutMean of three blind ranks across all 28 first outputs, n = 1 each
GPT Image 1.533.3 / 100
Seedream 5.0 ProHigher blind-rank score40.7 / 100
Gradually sample test: Product photographyMean of three blind ranks across all 28 first outputs, n = 1 each
GPT Image 1.537 / 100
Seedream 5.0 ProHigher blind-rank score74.1 / 100
Gradually sample test: Character and detailMean of three blind ranks across all 28 first outputs, n = 1 each
GPT Image 1.5Higher blind-rank score85.2 / 100
Seedream 5.0 Pro58 / 100
Gradually sample test: InfographicMean of three blind ranks across all 28 first outputs, n = 1 each
GPT Image 1.549.4 / 100
Seedream 5.0 ProHigher blind-rank score97.5 / 100

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Capability benchmark scores for GPT Image 1.5 and Seedream 5.0 Pro
BenchmarkGPT Image 1.5Seedream 5.0 Pro
Gradually sample test: Typography and layout
33.3 / 100
Mean rank: 19 (20 / 18 / 19)
Five rubric scores
Headline: 1.67 / 2
Subline: 1.67 / 2
Text control: 1.67 / 2
Visual brief: 1.33 / 2
Layout: 1 / 2
Higher blind-rank score40.7 / 100
Mean rank: 17 (13 / 20 / 18)
Five rubric scores
Headline: 1.67 / 2
Subline: 1.67 / 2
Text control: 1.67 / 2
Visual brief: 1.33 / 2
Layout: 1 / 2
Gradually sample test: Product photography
37 / 100
Mean rank: 18 (18 / 16 / 20)
Five rubric scores
Subject: 1.33 / 2
Time: 1 / 2
Watch details: 1.33 / 2
Photography: 1.33 / 2
Exclusions: 1.33 / 2
Higher blind-rank score74.1 / 100
Mean rank: 8 (6 / 7 / 11)
Five rubric scores
Subject: 1.33 / 2
Time: 1.33 / 2
Watch details: 1.33 / 2
Photography: 1.33 / 2
Exclusions: 1.33 / 2
Gradually sample test: Character and detail
Higher blind-rank score85.2 / 100
Mean rank: 5 (5 / 8 / 2)
Five rubric scores
Scene: 1.33 / 2
Wardrobe: 1.33 / 2
Anatomy: 1 / 2
Props: 1.33 / 2
Environment: 1.33 / 2
58 / 100
Mean rank: 12.33 (17 / 11 / 9)
Five rubric scores
Scene: 1.33 / 2
Wardrobe: 1.33 / 2
Anatomy: 1 / 2
Props: 1 / 2
Environment: 1 / 2
Gradually sample test: Infographic
49.4 / 100
Mean rank: 14.67 (13 / 15 / 16)
Five rubric scores
Title: 1.67 / 2
Sequence: 1.67 / 2
Labels: 1 / 2
Diagram: 1.67 / 2
Clarity: 1 / 2
Higher blind-rank score97.5 / 100
Mean rank: 1.67 (1 / 3 / 1)
Five rubric scores
Title: 1.67 / 2
Sequence: 1.67 / 2
Labels: 1.67 / 2
Diagram: 1.67 / 2
Clarity: 1.67 / 2

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Independent preference tests

Shared arena benchmarks

Artificial Analysis and Arena derive scores from blind comparisons. Raters see outputs for the same prompt and choose the image they prefer. Separate series cover text rendering, photorealism, portraits, art, commercial design, and image editing. Confidence intervals indicate how certain a measured lead is.

12 shared result series
GPT Image 1.5Seedream 5.0 Pro
Text to Image ArenaBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better
GPT Image 1.5Higher score1,310 Elo
Seedream 5.0 Pro1,280 Elo
Image Editing ArenaBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better
GPT Image 1.5No clear lead1,251 Elo
Seedream 5.0 Pro1,248 Elo
LMArena Text to Image: 3D modelingBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better
GPT Image 1.51,215.437
Seedream 5.0 ProHigher score1,244.482
LMArena Text to Image: ArtBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better
GPT Image 1.51,223.911
Seedream 5.0 ProHigher score1,265.974
LMArena Text to Image: CartoonBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better
GPT Image 1.51,243.08
Seedream 5.0 ProHigher score1,271.272
LMArena Text to Image: Commercial designBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better
GPT Image 1.5No clear lead1,240.908
Seedream 5.0 Pro1,232.843
LMArena Text to Image: OverallBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better
GPT Image 1.51,238.658
Seedream 5.0 ProHigher score1,256.865
LMArena Text to Image: PhotorealismBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better
GPT Image 1.51,248.785
Seedream 5.0 ProHigher score1,277.69
LMArena Text to Image: PortraitsBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better
GPT Image 1.51,261.416
Seedream 5.0 ProHigher score1,287.35
LMArena Text to Image: Text renderingBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better
GPT Image 1.5No clear lead1,254.593
Seedream 5.0 Pro1,252.031
LMArena Image Editing: Multi-image editingBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better
GPT Image 1.51,341.507
Seedream 5.0 ProHigher score1,413.844
LMArena Image Editing: OverallBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better
GPT Image 1.51,370.209
Seedream 5.0 ProHigher score1,394.014

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Arena benchmark scores for GPT Image 1.5 and Seedream 5.0 Pro
BenchmarkGPT Image 1.5Seedream 5.0 ProSource
Text to Image Arena
Higher score1,310 Elo
Rank 5, 95% confidence interval: ±9, 13,674 ratings
1,280 Elo
Rank 11, 95% confidence interval: ±9, 12,099 ratings
Artificial AnalysisRetrieved 2026-08-26
Image Editing Arena
No clear lead1,251 Elo
Rank 6, 95% confidence interval: ±7, 11,694 ratings
1,248 Elo
Rank 9, 95% confidence interval: ±10, 3,838 ratings
Artificial AnalysisRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Text to Image: 3D modeling
1,215.437
Rank 11, 95% confidence interval: ±6.83, 14,763 ratings
Higher score1,244.482
Rank 6, 95% confidence interval: ±12.4, 2,280 ratings
LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Text to Image: Art
1,223.911
Rank 11, 95% confidence interval: ±6.08, 19,937 ratings
Higher score1,265.974
Rank 5, 95% confidence interval: ±10.13, 3,711 ratings
LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Text to Image: Cartoon
1,243.08
Rank 10, 95% confidence interval: ±4.87, 55,661 ratings
Higher score1,271.272
Rank 5, 95% confidence interval: ±7.94, 9,462 ratings
LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Text to Image: Commercial design
No clear lead1,240.908
Rank 10, 95% confidence interval: ±4.72, 55,926 ratings
1,232.843
Rank 12, 95% confidence interval: ±7.55, 9,462 ratings
LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Text to Image: Overall
1,238.658
Rank 11, 95% confidence interval: ±3.36, 142,427 ratings
Higher score1,256.865
Rank 7, 95% confidence interval: ±5.11, 26,510 ratings
LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Text to Image: Photorealism
1,248.785
Rank 11, 95% confidence interval: ±4.83, 57,631 ratings
Higher score1,277.69
Rank 5, 95% confidence interval: ±7.63, 10,332 ratings
LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Text to Image: Portraits
1,261.416
Rank 9, 95% confidence interval: ±5.95, 28,153 ratings
Higher score1,287.35
Rank 4, 95% confidence interval: ±9.48, 4,809 ratings
LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Text to Image: Text rendering
No clear lead1,254.593
Rank 10, 95% confidence interval: ±4.98, 51,503 ratings
1,252.031
Rank 12, 95% confidence interval: ±7.82, 8,809 ratings
LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Image Editing: Multi-image editing
1,341.507
Rank 9, 95% confidence interval: ±4.04, 164,316 ratings
Higher score1,413.844
Rank 2, 95% confidence interval: ±6.39, 13,473 ratings
LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Image Editing: Overall
1,370.209
Rank 13, 95% confidence interval: ±2.92, 531,138 ratings
Higher score1,394.014
Rank 6, 95% confidence interval: ±3.86, 102,314 ratings
LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Visual comparison

Sample images

Our images complement preference data, but do not replace it. The prompt, request count, and selection rule match. Provider resolution, quality tier, randomness, and prompt processing remain visible limitations, so this is not a fully controlled laboratory test.

Largely standardized comparison protocol. Both models receive the same archived prompt, exactly one request, and the first result counts. Files are normalized to 1,024 × 1,024 pixels without cropping. Provider resolution, randomness, quality tier, and prompt processing can still differ. These images are a practical visual test, not a reconstruction of the arena configuration.

Character and detail

Anatomy, clothing, and spatial consistency

Seedream 5.0 Pro, Character and detail
GPT Image 1.5, Character and detail
GPT Image 1.5
Seedream 5.0 Pro
Prompt and settings

Create a square cinematic full-body portrait of a fictional bicycle courier waiting under a transparent umbrella at a rainy tram stop in Hamburg at blue hour. She wears a mustard raincoat, navy trousers, red sneakers, a silver helmet, and carries a teal messenger bag. Keep both hands visible, render the bicycle correctly, use realistic wet-street reflections, and include no readable brand names.

GPT Image 1.5. Provider Together, 1024x1024, n=1, seed=provider random, provider default steps, model ID openai/gpt-image-1.5, generated Aug 14, 2026, 12:17 PM. Source
Seedream 5.0 Pro. Provider OpenRouter, aspect ratio 1:1, resolution 1K, n=1, seed=provider random, actual cost $0.045000, model ID bytedance-seed/seedream-5-0-pro, generated Aug 14, 2026, 1:32 PM. Source

Protocol gradually-image-comparison-v1, selection rule: first result.

Prompt SHA 256: 985a75b38642a9f0e5e0c0e0c67f1b7f67780d42bd2168fa24e9a7a7a94b0da6

GPT Image 1.5, image SHA 256: 0dff52ccd39400ac66ac8870c9ea937512ff1474688e70118688f420c38c2296

GPT Image 1.5, request SHA 256: 5199631ac6ff07633dd2fb6ab61c918c26e1e02f37e6131828072233ac04527d

Seedream 5.0 Pro, image SHA 256: 06eb1919b5157094ba0ecf0ddcfb921ebbfc937c496cee7627f4717fdd4a7d90

Seedream 5.0 Pro, request SHA 256: b87da08d3dc323cc39777805d520115b9c2a5c2c546e4255f76350cfced21c93

Infographic

Numbers, labels, and visual organization

Seedream 5.0 Pro, Infographic
GPT Image 1.5, Infographic
GPT Image 1.5
Seedream 5.0 Pro
Prompt and settings

Create a square German infographic titled SO FUNKTIONIERT PHOTOSYNTHESE. Show exactly four numbered steps in this order: 1 LICHT, 2 WASSER, 3 CO₂, 4 ZUCKER + SAUERSTOFF. Use a clean editorial science style with one plant cross-section, simple arrows, high contrast, legible labels, and no other text.

GPT Image 1.5. Provider Together, 1024x1024, n=1, seed=provider random, provider default steps, model ID openai/gpt-image-1.5, generated Aug 14, 2026, 12:17 PM. Source
Seedream 5.0 Pro. Provider OpenRouter, aspect ratio 1:1, resolution 1K, n=1, seed=provider random, actual cost $0.045000, model ID bytedance-seed/seedream-5-0-pro, generated Aug 14, 2026, 1:34 PM. Source

Protocol gradually-image-comparison-v1, selection rule: first result.

Prompt SHA 256: ed65cb4e6a51e2336f8b149ad4cbb16e020f07d527ad94362e719d2dcf91d94f

GPT Image 1.5, image SHA 256: 1c9ff59c32621c8b48b002dacb0ae66487262280c7c0a5b3d6456c81b248ebe9

GPT Image 1.5, request SHA 256: 7f1efc9531f1e6bed7d61a11c637add9fd892001aea2bb2781f8d89c79a2eb03

Seedream 5.0 Pro, image SHA 256: bec4d5de9deed41729f7e7d93f77450e76ddd0f579b5f0c74244a25e0c03a224

Seedream 5.0 Pro, request SHA 256: 6378a9ed943b1c15141e5f0f7889734e6c1dd936829106b7673862af0dc0618b

Product photography

Materials, reflections, and fine details

Seedream 5.0 Pro, Product photography
GPT Image 1.5, Product photography
GPT Image 1.5
Seedream 5.0 Pro
Prompt and settings

Create a square premium product photograph of a brushed titanium wristwatch standing upright on dark green marble. The watch has a cream dial, thin black hands set to 10:10, twelve distinct hour markers, a realistic crown, and a dark brown leather strap. Soft window light from the left, controlled reflections, shallow depth of field, no text, no logo, no extra objects.

GPT Image 1.5. Provider Together, 1024x1024, n=1, seed=provider random, provider default steps, model ID openai/gpt-image-1.5, generated Aug 14, 2026, 12:16 PM. Source
Seedream 5.0 Pro. Provider OpenRouter, aspect ratio 1:1, resolution 1K, n=1, seed=provider random, actual cost $0.045000, model ID bytedance-seed/seedream-5-0-pro, generated Aug 14, 2026, 1:29 PM. Source

Protocol gradually-image-comparison-v1, selection rule: first result.

Prompt SHA 256: c67fd71e91304458a2feef5c91efa8677260fab0c0099a29a2c52cb579f5b2f3

GPT Image 1.5, image SHA 256: 67cfa2f324447027ceb5f82e9446d40a1395b46ce425890a74606b4d97731cf6

GPT Image 1.5, request SHA 256: c850843a298631a4076c5d2686de8e9d7223534f2b8ca53505f437862718bef9

Seedream 5.0 Pro, image SHA 256: fd38abd0e7bde742e8e859fbcbc76e4e96f443673445378a42364bc56382ac57

Seedream 5.0 Pro, request SHA 256: fd964253baf8416825b563e8e84be2ed24f4f650f2f364ca15beb60541050585

Typography and layout

Legible text, hierarchy, and composition

Seedream 5.0 Pro, Typography and layout
GPT Image 1.5, Typography and layout
GPT Image 1.5
Seedream 5.0 Pro
Prompt and settings

Create a square editorial poster for an imaginary night train called MONDFALTER. Show the exact German headline MONDFALTER and the exact subline BERLIN NACH LISSABON. Use a restrained midnight-blue and warm-cream palette, one stylized moth, strong Swiss-grid typography, generous negative space, and no additional words or logos.

GPT Image 1.5. Provider Together, 1024x1024, n=1, seed=provider random, provider default steps, model ID openai/gpt-image-1.5, generated Aug 14, 2026, 1:59 PM. Source
Seedream 5.0 Pro. Provider OpenRouter, aspect ratio 1:1, resolution 1K, n=1, seed=provider random, actual cost $0.045000, model ID bytedance-seed/seedream-5-0-pro, generated Aug 14, 2026, 2:05 PM. Source

Protocol gradually-image-comparison-v1, selection rule: first result.

Prompt SHA 256: 2e012c3d14ee5dd02203a94f394ca80a5038cdebd6032b25a8b8a221f2255419

GPT Image 1.5, image SHA 256: 6a4cec86850fd371b65274198e2bf630b3cf36a096f9fb953d4bfe17c3222ebe

GPT Image 1.5, request SHA 256: 9c3a396aecfcaae3f8a25edbe5c8c44d0d33199d7ba29efda864d2b0221c3250

Seedream 5.0 Pro, image SHA 256: 4e9693d5da3e445b69cc5da6f869caddb88ca5560f010556b168ac8e9aaa70b2

Seedream 5.0 Pro, request SHA 256: 4158892e26a143eaab8c23a0c9d6897a7510af309ae06a2c234f6bbc41854e2c

How to read this comparison

An Elo score is not a verdict on creativity

A higher arena score means this specific configuration was preferred more often in blind comparisons.

Typography, character consistency, local execution, licensing, and price may matter more to your workload than overall visual appeal.

Prices cover 1,000 images at 1,024 × 1,024 pixels using settings documented by Artificial Analysis. Subscriptions and special rates are excluded.

More matchups

Related image model comparisons

Compare GPT Image 1.5 and Seedream 5.0 Pro with other important image models using the same benchmark and sample methodology.

View the complete image model comparison