HiDream-O1-Imagevs.GPT Image 2.5 Flare

Which one is better?

GPT Image 2.5 Flare leads in both ratings: in our own test and in the arena. GPT Image 2.5 Flare costs 5.3 times as much per image.

Test images

Same task, the first image of each. The task with the biggest difference is preselected.

HiDream-O1-Image: Infographic, first image from the fixed test run — HiDream-O1-Image43 out of 100

GPT Image 2.5 Flare: Infographic, first image from the fixed test run — GPT Image 2.5 Flare91 out of 100

Result for “Infographic”:GPT Image 2.5 Flare ahead

Prompt given to both modelsCreate 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.

What the rating looks at: Numbers, labels, and visual organization.

“Ahead”: better in all three rating rounds. “Slightly ahead”: a higher value, but not in every round.

Test protocol of the images

Each test attempt uses the same archived prompt and one request. The first output of that attempt counts. Repeats after technical test failures are disclosed for the affected images. Files are normalized to 1,024 × 1,024 pixels without cropping. Provider resolution, randomness, quality tier and prompt processing can still differ. The images are a practical visual test, not a reconstruction of the arena configuration.

Character and detail

HiDream-O1-Image: fal, requested 1024x1024, n=1, seed=1735022440, estimated cost $0.010486, generated Aug 14, 2026, 1:53 PM. Source

GPT Image 2.5 Flare: openai, 1024x1024, quality high, n=1, generated Sep 28, 2026, 8:53 PM. Source

Protocol gradually-image-comparison-v1. Prompt SHA 256: 985a75b38642a9f0e5e0c0e0c67f1b7f67780d42bd2168fa24e9a7a7a94b0da6

HiDream-O1-Image image SHA 256: 9ac2cbe23ee6a63b0daacd665a40c3471c52c52fd6ad23e46d3027bb95f8c880

GPT Image 2.5 Flare image SHA 256: 85b17c41b19389cae3ea073ef582e6065a321d741978e772987d22e3ea3e3b08

Infographic

HiDream-O1-Image: fal, requested 1024x1024, n=1, seed=1456348218, estimated cost $0.010486, generated Aug 14, 2026, 1:53 PM. Source

GPT Image 2.5 Flare: openai, 1024x1024, quality high, n=1, generated Sep 28, 2026, 8:53 PM. Source

Protocol gradually-image-comparison-v1. Prompt SHA 256: ed65cb4e6a51e2336f8b149ad4cbb16e020f07d527ad94362e719d2dcf91d94f

HiDream-O1-Image image SHA 256: 258eece8b53e4df0c990b78dee2e02ec57569b1c823c3feff2ab54671240d66f

GPT Image 2.5 Flare image SHA 256: bc752abfce1c0d27b73e4084c3e7d82c4c0f71e0e5af97a80f4b24326cc4686e

Product photography

HiDream-O1-Image: fal, requested 1024x1024, n=1, seed=124666889, estimated cost $0.010486, generated Aug 14, 2026, 1:53 PM. Source

GPT Image 2.5 Flare: openai, 1024x1024, quality high, n=1, generated Sep 28, 2026, 8:53 PM. Source

Protocol gradually-image-comparison-v1. Prompt SHA 256: c67fd71e91304458a2feef5c91efa8677260fab0c0099a29a2c52cb579f5b2f3

HiDream-O1-Image image SHA 256: 5a9cd3c59556412e4de93a3ef5c4121ec12b6cc02730cad527619c2d8a889783

GPT Image 2.5 Flare image SHA 256: 69fedb7d635d1329c461ff1ee9e5cf8384119e218e3b3bdb93b9e11f728335d8

Typography and layout

HiDream-O1-Image: fal, requested 1024x1024, n=1, seed=2131088503, estimated cost $0.010486, generated Aug 14, 2026, 2:41 PM. Source

GPT Image 2.5 Flare: openai, 1024x1024, quality high, n=1, generated Sep 28, 2026, 8:52 PM. Source

Protocol gradually-image-comparison-v1. Prompt SHA 256: 2e012c3d14ee5dd02203a94f394ca80a5038cdebd6032b25a8b8a221f2255419

HiDream-O1-Image image SHA 256: 418a9b974b87b751ad2e4e98cdf6b8d7e2f8f352aed63d25be84c02377f310d1

GPT Image 2.5 Flare image SHA 256: cc90d54a99e1bad9e0cc8e4196746fb1d56a2fdd2a9ee101dbbf270ef5e4b6a8

The numbers at a glance

Arena ratingfrom votes by users · higher is better

1,115

HiDream-O1-Image

Rank 19 of 21

1,401

GPT Image 2.5 Flare

Rank 2 of 21

GraduallyBenchour own rating, 0 to 100 · higher is better

HiDream-O1-Image

Rank 77 of 108

GPT Image 2.5 Flare

Rank 18 of 108

Price per imagedollars through the API · lower is better

$0.04

HiDream-O1-Image

fairly cheap

$0.21

GPT Image 2.5 Flare

expensive

Ranks among the 21 image models with an arena rating and the 108 with a GraduallyBench run; prices compared with 28 models with an API price.

HiDream-O1-Image

Subscription: n/a No plan in Germany names exactly this model.
Via API: $0.04 per image, 100 images $4.
License: Open weights.

GPT Image 2.5 Flare

Subscription: No OpenAI subscription includes this model. Through other providers from ≈ €6.34 a month (ElevenLabs Starter, with limited credits). 61 plans in Germany.
Via API: $0.21 per image, 100 images $21.07.

Subscriptions only count plans that name exactly this model. Subscription prices include VAT, API prices are in dollars.

Arena rating (LMArena) from Oct 28, 2026 · GraduallyBench from Nov 3, 2026 · API prices from Nov 3, 2026 · Subscription database from Sep 29, 2026 (38 days old)

All data side by side

The better value is bold. For ratings only when the gap is clear.

Kennzahl	HiDream-O1-Image	GPT Image 2.5 Flare
Ratings
Arena ratingfrom votes by users, higher is better	1,115	1,401
Arena rank	Rank 19 of 21	Rank 2 of 21
Arena votesmore votes, a safer rating	77,624	39,218
GraduallyBenchour own rating, 0 to 100	34	72
GraduallyBench by task
Typography and layoutLegible text, hierarchy, and composition	18	64
Product photographyMaterials, reflections, and fine details	31	69
Character and detailAnatomy, clothing, and spatial consistency	45	63
InfographicNumbers, labels, and visual organization	43	91
API price
Per imagelower is better	$0.04	$0.21
100 images	$4	$21.07
Profile
Released	May 2026	Sep 8, 2026
Weightsopen means: runs locally	open	proprietary
Access	API, local	API
Parameters	8 billion	not published
Largest output	2,048 × 2,048 pixels	not consistently published
Plans in Germanynaming exactly this model	n/a	61

API prices for one image at 1,024 × 1,024 pixels according to Artificial Analysis.

Sources: HiDream-O1-Image model source (verified Aug 15, 2026) · GPT Image 2.5 Flare model source (verified Sep 22, 2026)

Arena ratings by category

From blind votes on LMArena. “Ahead” means the lead is clear.

Arena rating per categoryfrom votes by users · higher is betterHiDream-O1-ImageGPT Image 2.5 Flare

Text to Image Arena9751,207ahead

Image Editing Arena9551,183ahead

Text to Image: 3D modeling1,1221,378ahead

Text to Image: Agentic image generation1,1111,358ahead

Text to Image: Art1,1161,387ahead

Text to Image: Cartoon1,1181,431ahead

Text to Image: Commercial design1,1291,387ahead

Text to Image: Overall1,1151,401ahead

Text to Image: Photorealism1,1091,415ahead

Text to Image: Portraits1,1051,439ahead

Text to Image: Text rendering1,1341,435ahead

Artificial Analysis from Nov 3, 2026 · LMArena from Oct 28, 2026

All individual values with sources

Rating	HiDream-O1-Image	GPT Image 2.5 Flare	Source
Text to Image Arena	975	1,207	Artificial AnalysisRetrieved Nov 3, 2026
Image Editing Arena	955	1,183	Artificial AnalysisRetrieved Nov 3, 2026
Text to Image: 3D modeling	1,122	1,378	LMArenaRetrieved Oct 28, 2026
Text to Image: Agentic image generation	1,111	1,358	LMArenaRetrieved Oct 28, 2026
Text to Image: Art	1,116	1,387	LMArenaRetrieved Oct 28, 2026
Text to Image: Cartoon	1,118	1,431	LMArenaRetrieved Oct 28, 2026
Text to Image: Commercial design	1,129	1,387	LMArenaRetrieved Oct 28, 2026
Text to Image: Overall	1,115	1,401	LMArenaRetrieved Oct 28, 2026
Text to Image: Photorealism	1,109	1,415	LMArenaRetrieved Oct 28, 2026
Text to Image: Portraits	1,105	1,439	LMArenaRetrieved Oct 28, 2026
Text to Image: Text rendering	1,134	1,435	LMArenaRetrieved Oct 28, 2026

More comparisons with HiDream-O1-Image and GPT Image 2.5 Flare

Compare HiDream-O1-Image and GPT Image 2.5 Flare with the models people compare them with most often.

HiDream-O1-Imagevs.GPT Image 2.5 Flare

Test images

The numbers at a glance

HiDream-O1-Image

GPT Image 2.5 Flare

All data side by side

Arena ratings by category

More comparisons with HiDream-O1-Image and GPT Image 2.5 Flare

Compare another matchup

Predecessor and successor

The most popular comparisons