WAND-Vega-Image 1.0 Provs.FLUX1.1 [pro]
Which one is better?
We have not tested WAND-Vega-Image 1.0 Pro ourselves yet. Neither is in the arena. Neither has an API price.
Same prompt, two images
Same task, the first image of each.
No image from the four fixed tasks for WAND-Vega-Image 1.0 Pro yet.This model does not yet have a complete GraduallyBench run.
![FLUX1.1 [pro]: Typography and layout, first image from the fixed test run](/_astro-img/000d3baf3e638643/1024.avif)
Result for “Typography and layout”:only FLUX1.1 [pro] tested
What the rating looks at: Legible text, hierarchy, and composition.
“Ahead”: better in all three rating rounds. “Slightly ahead”: a higher value, but not in every round.
Missing image run for WAND-Vega-Image 1.0 Pro
This model does not yet have a complete GraduallyBench run. Run the missing fixed tasks, archive the first output of each, and evaluate them blind.
DocumentationThe numbers at a glance
WAND-Vega-Image 1.0 Pro
not in the arena
FLUX1.1 [pro]
not in the arena
WAND-Vega-Image 1.0 Pro
not tested yet
FLUX1.1 [pro]
Rank 62 of 74
WAND-Vega-Image 1.0 Pro
no API price
FLUX1.1 [pro]
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.
WAND-Vega-Image 1.0 Pro
- Subscription
- n/a No plan in Germany names exactly this model.
- Via API
- No API price known. Access: API.
- Weights
- unknown.
FLUX1.1 [pro]
- Subscription
- No Black Forest Labs subscription includes this model. Through other providers from ≈ €9.59 a month (Krea Basic, with limited credits). 14 plans in Germany.
- Via API
- No API price known. Access: API.
- Weights
- unknown.
Subscriptions only count plans that name exactly this model. Subscription prices include VAT, API prices are in dollars.
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 | WAND-Vega-Image 1.0 Pro | FLUX1.1 [pro] |
|---|---|---|
| Ratings | ||
| Arena ratingfrom votes by users, higher is better | n/a | n/a |
| Arena rank | n/a | n/a |
| Arena votesmore votes, a safer rating | n/a | n/a |
| GraduallyBenchour own rating, 0 to 100 | n/a | 25 |
| GraduallyBench by task | ||
| Typography and layoutLegible text, hierarchy, and composition | n/a | 24 |
| Product photographyMaterials, reflections, and fine details | n/a | 22 |
| Character and detailAnatomy, clothing, and spatial consistency | n/a | 36 |
| InfographicNumbers, labels, and visual organization | n/a | 17 |
| API price | ||
| Per imagelower is better | n/a | n/a |
| 100 images | n/a | n/a |
| Profile | ||
| Released | n/a | n/a |
| Weightsopen means: runs locally | unknown | unknown |
| Lifecycle | no notice | Older, still documented BFL text-to-image API route |
| Access | API | API |
| Parameters | not published | not published |
| Largest output | 4K | not consistently published |
| Plans in Germanynaming exactly this model | n/a | 14 |
API prices for one image at 1,024 × 1,024 pixels according to Artificial Analysis.
Sources: WAND-Vega-Image 1.0 Pro model source (verified Nov 1, 2026) · FLUX1.1 [pro] model source, status 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 WAND-Vega-Image 1.0 Pro and FLUX1.1 [pro] from the same arena and category. Older model versions are not used as substitutes.
Compare another matchup
More matchups
Related image model comparisons
Compare WAND-Vega-Image 1.0 Pro and FLUX1.1 [pro] with other important image models.