Qwen-Image-2.1vs.Lumina-Image 2.0

Which one is better?

In our own test, Qwen-Image-2.1 leads. Lumina-Image 2.0 has no arena rating yet. Neither has an API price.

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

Qwen-Image-2.1: Infographic, first image from the fixed test run — Qwen-Image-2.182 out of 100

Lumina-Image 2.0: Infographic, first image from the fixed test run — Lumina-Image 2.06 out of 100

Result for “Infographic”:Qwen-Image-2.1 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

Both models receive the same archived prompt in 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. The images are a practical visual test, not a reconstruction of the arena configuration.

Character and detail

Qwen-Image-2.1: manual, 1:1, requested and received 1024x1024, one request, first output, Qwen/Qwen-Image-2.1 base, 40 steps, true CFG 1.0, prompt enhancement disabled, no negative prompt, no reference images, seed=1591420783, official Space commit 5694809f4c56a4e8c40787b5392cecac36493c5d, generated Nov 1, 2026, 8:49 AM. Source

Lumina-Image 2.0: fal, requested 1024x1024, n=1, seed=provider random, estimated cost $0.150000, generated Nov 1, 2026, 9:38 PM. Source

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

Qwen-Image-2.1 image SHA 256: b29bb7e207ad464957ee060bbf0655104bcbece703360254e48daa3ec35a62d7

Lumina-Image 2.0 image SHA 256: 8747df0401d91598486735bfff5d6bac6c139727a8bc50c60bf7f697f678b85f

Infographic

Qwen-Image-2.1: manual, 1:1, requested and received 1024x1024, one request, first output, Qwen/Qwen-Image-2.1 base, 40 steps, true CFG 1.0, prompt enhancement disabled, no negative prompt, no reference images, seed=1283422012, official Space commit 5694809f4c56a4e8c40787b5392cecac36493c5d, prior anonymous attempt refused before inference (ZeroGPU quota), completed through authenticated browser, generated Nov 1, 2026, 8:49 AM. Source

Lumina-Image 2.0: fal, requested 1024x1024, n=1, seed=provider random, estimated cost $0.150000, generated Nov 1, 2026, 9:38 PM. Source

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

Qwen-Image-2.1 image SHA 256: 316e38ed63ff401f86a7ceee9cc65c74413e0e9c7c899a6e6bf453acc2940dac

Lumina-Image 2.0 image SHA 256: b937b28f3c3209280c5828e18c85341d3ca443175020ca1e407dae035b5df14f

Product photography

Qwen-Image-2.1: manual, 1:1, requested and received 1024x1024, one request, first output, Qwen/Qwen-Image-2.1 base, 40 steps, true CFG 1.0, prompt enhancement disabled, no negative prompt, no reference images, seed=196359631, official Space commit 5694809f4c56a4e8c40787b5392cecac36493c5d, generated Nov 1, 2026, 8:49 AM. Source

Lumina-Image 2.0: fal, requested 1024x1024, n=1, seed=provider random, estimated cost $0.150000, generated Nov 1, 2026, 9:38 PM. Source

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

Qwen-Image-2.1 image SHA 256: 041f559d4261865b327fcae4f8bb0bd3b176c55a3b1255a042ab3e0fc4f9bc4b

Lumina-Image 2.0 image SHA 256: 74b79fcbad7565e29995c941d2b488d2edde884b307ed99e47fad994424e9dfc

Typography and layout

Qwen-Image-2.1: manual, 1:1, requested and received 1024x1024, one request, first output, Qwen/Qwen-Image-2.1 base, 40 steps, true CFG 1.0, prompt enhancement disabled, no negative prompt, no reference images, seed=158818011, official Space commit 5694809f4c56a4e8c40787b5392cecac36493c5d, generated Nov 1, 2026, 8:49 AM. Source

Lumina-Image 2.0: fal, requested 1024x1024, n=1, seed=provider random, estimated cost $0.150000, generated Nov 1, 2026, 9:37 PM. Source

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

Qwen-Image-2.1 image SHA 256: 4670269190f492154c05e3f18c4eb9e3938910ca1aca32503b6a1ceb16d39b38

Lumina-Image 2.0 image SHA 256: f132c159d659fb76c94cd82f1decb617c475b9c4095b177d02b73f09f2954df0

The numbers at a glance

Arena ratingfrom votes by users · higher is better

1,225

Qwen-Image-2.1

Rank 14 of 22

n/a

Lumina-Image 2.0

not in the arena

GraduallyBenchour own rating, 0 to 100 · higher is better

Qwen-Image-2.1

Rank 37 of 74

Lumina-Image 2.0

Rank 72 of 74

Price per imagedollars through the API · lower is better

n/a

Qwen-Image-2.1

no API price

n/a

Lumina-Image 2.0

no API price

Ranks among the 22 image models with an arena rating and the 74 with a GraduallyBench run; prices compared with 28 models with an API price.

Qwen-Image-2.1

Subscription: No Alibaba subscription includes this model. Through other providers from ≈ €9.59 a month (Krea Basic, with limited credits). 5 plans in Germany.
Via API: No API price known. Access: local, Web app.
License: Open weights, Qwen Research License: non-commercial use only; commercial use requires a separate license.

Lumina-Image 2.0

Subscription: n/a No plan in Germany names exactly this model.
Via API: No API price known. Access: local.
License: Open weights.

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 1, 2026 · Subscription database from Sep 29, 2026 (34 days old)

All data side by side

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

Kennzahl	Qwen-Image-2.1	Lumina-Image 2.0
Ratings
Arena ratingfrom votes by users, higher is better	1,225	n/a
Arena rank	Rank 14 of 22	n/a
Arena votesmore votes, a safer rating	19,604	n/a
GraduallyBenchour own rating, 0 to 100	56	7
GraduallyBench by task
Typography and layoutLegible text, hierarchy, and composition	50	1
Product photographyMaterials, reflections, and fine details	72	4
Character and detailAnatomy, clothing, and spatial consistency	21	17
InfographicNumbers, labels, and visual organization	82	6
API price
Per imagelower is better	n/a	n/a
100 images	n/a	n/a
Profile
Released	Sep 20, 2026	Jan 25, 2025
Weightsopen means: runs locally	openQwen Research License: non-commercial use only; commercial use requires a separate license	open
Access	local, Web app	local
Parameters	not published	2.6 billion
Largest output	2K	not consistently published
Plans in Germanynaming exactly this model	5	n/a

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

Sources: Qwen-Image-2.1 model source, status source (verified Sep 22, 2026) · Lumina-Image 2.0 model source (verified Nov 1, 2026)

Arena ratings by category

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

No shared arena score in the stored snapshot

The stored benchmark database contains no measurement for Qwen-Image-2.1 and Lumina-Image 2.0 from the same arena and category. Older model versions are not used as substitutes.

Compare another matchup

First image modelSecond image model

More matchups

Compare Qwen-Image-2.1 and Lumina-Image 2.0 with other important image models.

View the complete image model comparison

Same prompt, two images

The numbers at a glance

Qwen-Image-2.1

Lumina-Image 2.0

All data side by side

Arena ratings by category

No shared arena score in the stored snapshot

Compare another matchup

Related image model comparisons