Image modelNo status listed

Wan 2.6 Text to Image

Alibaba

Released: January 2026
Data date: August 15, 2026

Category view

Position within the category

This overview uses only published data from matching cohorts. Missing values never change a rank.

This position gives equal weight to 4 fixed Gradually image tests. One archived first output contributes for each model and task.

Position: Rank 21 of 28
Index score: 39.2 / 100
Coverage: 4 / 4

Leaderboard

1MAI-Image-2.5 Flash76.6 / 100

2GPT Image 271 / 100

3MAI-Image-2.567.6 / 100

20Nano Banana 246 / 100

21Wan 2.6 Text to Image39.2 / 100

22Firefly Image Model 538.9 / 100

28Stable Diffusion 3.5 Large2.5 / 100

Source: Gradually-Bildtest

Measurements

Comparable benchmark results

Each chart contains exactly one source, one measurement series, and one stored comparison cohort. Bars show the position. The measured value appears on the right.

Text to Image Arena

1,210 Elo · Rank 21 of 25

Sample: 4,282 · Data date: August 26, 2026

1.GPT Image 21,371 Elo

19.Recraft V4.1 Utility1,218 Elo

20.Krea 2 Medium Turbo1,215 Elo

21.Wan 2.6 Text to Image1,210 Elo

22.FLUX.2 Pro1,208 Elo

23.HiDream-O1-Image1,175 Elo

25.FLUX.2 Klein 9B1,144 Elo

7 of 25 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

Source: Artificial AnalysisParticipants: 25

GEBench Chinese, single-step

64.2 points · Rank 4 of 5

Data date: August 26, 2026

1.Nano Banana Pro84.5 points

2.GPT Image 1.583.79 points

3.FLUX.2 Pro68.83 points

4.Wan 2.6 Text to Image64.2 points

5.Seedream 4.062.04 points

5 of 5 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

A bilingual graphical-user-interface benchmark. Chinese and English subsets and the single-step, multi-step, fictional-app, real-app, and grounding categories remain separate.

Source: GEBenchParticipants: 5

GEBench Chinese, multi-step

50.11 points · Rank 4 of 5

Data date: August 26, 2026

1.Nano Banana Pro68.65 points

2.GPT Image 1.556.97 points

3.FLUX.2 Pro55.07 points

4.Wan 2.6 Text to Image50.11 points

5.Seedream 4.048.64 points

5 of 5 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

A bilingual graphical-user-interface benchmark. Chinese and English subsets and the single-step, multi-step, fictional-app, real-app, and grounding categories remain separate.

Source: GEBenchParticipants: 5

GEBench Chinese, fictional app

52.72 points · Rank 4 of 5

Data date: August 26, 2026

1.Nano Banana Pro65.75 points

2.GPT Image 1.560.11 points

3.FLUX.2 Pro58.13 points

4.Wan 2.6 Text to Image52.72 points

5.Seedream 4.049.28 points

5 of 5 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

A bilingual graphical-user-interface benchmark. Chinese and English subsets and the single-step, multi-step, fictional-app, real-app, and grounding categories remain separate.

Source: GEBenchParticipants: 5

GEBench Chinese, real app

50.4 points · Rank 5 of 5

Data date: August 26, 2026

1.Nano Banana Pro64.35 points

2.GPT Image 1.555.65 points

3.FLUX.2 Pro55.41 points

4.Seedream 4.050.93 points

5.Wan 2.6 Text to Image50.4 points

5 of 5 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

A bilingual graphical-user-interface benchmark. Chinese and English subsets and the single-step, multi-step, fictional-app, real-app, and grounding categories remain separate.

Source: GEBenchParticipants: 5

GEBench Chinese, grounding

59.58 points · Rank 2 of 5

Data date: August 26, 2026

1.Nano Banana Pro64.83 points

2.Wan 2.6 Text to Image59.58 points

3.Seedream 4.053.53 points

4.GPT Image 1.553.33 points

5.FLUX.2 Pro50.24 points

5 of 5 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

A bilingual graphical-user-interface benchmark. Chinese and English subsets and the single-step, multi-step, fictional-app, real-app, and grounding categories remain separate.

Source: GEBenchParticipants: 5

GEBench Chinese, overall

55.4 points · Rank 4 of 5

Data date: August 26, 2026

1.Nano Banana Pro69.62 points

2.GPT Image 1.563.22 points

3.FLUX.2 Pro57.54 points

4.Wan 2.6 Text to Image55.4 points

5.Seedream 4.052.88 points

5 of 5 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

A bilingual graphical-user-interface benchmark. Chinese and English subsets and the single-step, multi-step, fictional-app, real-app, and grounding categories remain separate.

Source: GEBenchParticipants: 5

GEBench English, single-step

60.17 points · Rank 4 of 5

Data date: August 26, 2026

1.Nano Banana Pro84.32 points

2.GPT Image 1.580.8 points

3.FLUX.2 Pro61 points

4.Wan 2.6 Text to Image60.17 points

5.Seedream 4.053.28 points

5 of 5 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

A bilingual graphical-user-interface benchmark. Chinese and English subsets and the single-step, multi-step, fictional-app, real-app, and grounding categories remain separate.

Source: GEBenchParticipants: 5

GEBench English, multi-step

44.36 points · Rank 4 of 5

Data date: August 26, 2026

1.Nano Banana Pro69.51 points

2.GPT Image 1.558.87 points

3.FLUX.2 Pro52.17 points

4.Wan 2.6 Text to Image44.36 points

5.Seedream 4.037.57 points

5 of 5 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

A bilingual graphical-user-interface benchmark. Chinese and English subsets and the single-step, multi-step, fictional-app, real-app, and grounding categories remain separate.

Source: GEBenchParticipants: 5

GEBench English, fictional app

49.55 points · Rank 3 of 5

Data date: August 26, 2026

1.GPT Image 1.563.68 points

2.FLUX.2 Pro49.92 points

3.Wan 2.6 Text to Image49.55 points

4.Seedream 4.047.92 points

5.Nano Banana Pro46.33 points

5 of 5 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

A bilingual graphical-user-interface benchmark. Chinese and English subsets and the single-step, multi-step, fictional-app, real-app, and grounding categories remain separate.

Source: GEBenchParticipants: 5

GEBench English, real app

44.8 points · Rank 5 of 5

Data date: August 26, 2026

1.GPT Image 1.558.93 points

2.Seedream 4.049.36 points

3.Nano Banana Pro47.2 points

4.FLUX.2 Pro47.16 points

5.Wan 2.6 Text to Image44.8 points

5 of 5 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

A bilingual graphical-user-interface benchmark. Chinese and English subsets and the single-step, multi-step, fictional-app, real-app, and grounding categories remain separate.

Source: GEBenchParticipants: 5

GEBench English, grounding

53.36 points · Rank 2 of 5

Data date: August 26, 2026

1.Nano Banana Pro58.64 points

2.Wan 2.6 Text to Image53.36 points

3.GPT Image 1.549.23 points

4.FLUX.2 Pro45.67 points

5.Seedream 4.044.17 points

5 of 5 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

A bilingual graphical-user-interface benchmark. Chinese and English subsets and the single-step, multi-step, fictional-app, real-app, and grounding categories remain separate.

Source: GEBenchParticipants: 5

GEBench English, overall

50.45 points · Rank 4 of 5

Data date: August 26, 2026

1.GPT Image 1.563.16 points

2.Nano Banana Pro61.2 points

3.FLUX.2 Pro51.18 points

4.Wan 2.6 Text to Image50.45 points

5.Seedream 4.046.46 points

5 of 5 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

A bilingual graphical-user-interface benchmark. Chinese and English subsets and the single-step, multi-step, fictional-app, real-app, and grounding categories remain separate.

Source: GEBenchParticipants: 5

Gradually sample test: Typography and layout

14.8 rank points · Rank 24 of 28

Sample: 1 · Data date: August 18, 2026

1.MAI-Image-2.593.8 rank points

22.GPT Image 1.533.3 rank points

23.Seedream 4.018.5 rank points

24.Wan 2.6 Text to Image14.8 rank points

25.FLUX.2 Klein 9B9.9 rank points

26.HiDream-O1-Image6.2 rank points

28.Stable Diffusion 3.5 Large0 rank points

7 of 28 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

One archived, unfiltered first output per model. All 28 images are ranked in three model-blind orderings. The 0-100 value normalizes the mean rank. This remains an n = 1 sample, and an automated judge may have visual preferences of its own.

Source: Gradually-BildtestParticipants: 28

Gradually sample test: Product photography

25.9 rank points · Rank 21 of 28

Sample: 1 · Data date: August 18, 2026

1.GPT Image 295.1 rank points

19.GPT Image 1.537 rank points

20.Nano Banana 229.6 rank points

21.Wan 2.6 Text to Image25.9 rank points

22.Recraft V4.1 Utility22.2 rank points

23.Seedream 4.019.7 rank points

28.Stable Diffusion 3.5 Large3.7 rank points

7 of 28 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

Source: Gradually-BildtestParticipants: 28

Gradually sample test: Character and detail

66.7 rank points · Rank 9 of 28

Sample: 1 · Data date: August 18, 2026

1.MAI-Image-2.5 Flash86.4 rank points

8.FLUX.2 Pro70.4 rank points

9.Firefly Image Model 566.7 rank points

9.Wan 2.6 Text to Image66.7 rank points

11.Ideogram 4.064.2 rank points

12.Grok Imagine Image Quality59.3 rank points

28.Stable Diffusion 3.5 Large3.7 rank points

7 of 28 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

Source: Gradually-BildtestParticipants: 28

Gradually sample test: Infographic

49.4 rank points · Rank 14 of 28

Sample: 1 · Data date: August 18, 2026

1.Reve 2.197.5 rank points

14.GPT Image 1.549.4 rank points

14.Nano Banana 249.4 rank points

14.Wan 2.6 Text to Image49.4 rank points

17.Nano Banana Pro42 rank points

17.Recraft V4.1 Utility42 rank points

28.Firefly Image Model 51.2 rank points

7 of 28 model versions shown in this chart. A higher value ranks first.

Source: Gradually-BildtestParticipants: 28

Profile

Specifications and access

Published information about this model. Unknown values are not estimated.

Weights: ProprietarySource
Access: APISource
Maximum output: 2KSource
Benchmark configuration: Text to ImageSource

Pricing

Published prices

Prices remain tied to their documented unit and source.

Representative price: $0.03 per imageSource
Together AI (Wan-AI/Wan2.6-image): $0.03 per imageSource

Measurements

Other published benchmarks

The stored dataset does not contain an exactly matching comparison cohort for these values.

LMArena Text to Image: 3D modeling

1,145.88 points

Rank 31 · 17,534 samples · Retrieved August 26, 2026

LMArena

LMArena Text to Image: Art

1,156.61 points

Rank 27 · 23,269 samples · Retrieved August 26, 2026

LMArena

LMArena Text to Image: Cartoon

1,145.34 points

Rank 32 · 73,425 samples · Retrieved August 26, 2026

LMArena

LMArena Text to Image: Commercial design

1,148.09 points

Rank 31 · 69,457 samples · Retrieved August 26, 2026

LMArena

LMArena Text to Image: Overall

1,135.88 points

Rank 35 · 182,381 samples · Retrieved August 26, 2026

LMArena

LMArena Text to Image: Photorealism

1,128.05 points

Rank 39 · 74,727 samples · Retrieved August 26, 2026

LMArena

LMArena Text to Image: Portraits

1,122.44 points

Rank 44 · 40,808 samples · Retrieved August 26, 2026

LMArena

LMArena Text to Image: Text rendering

1,148.76 points

Rank 31 · 66,011 samples · Retrieved August 26, 2026

LMArena

Head-to-head comparisons

Compare this model

Each matchup compares this model with exactly one other model from the same category.

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. GPT Image 2

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. Reve 2.1

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. Nano Banana 2

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. GPT Image 1.5

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. MAI-Image-2.5

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. Nano Banana Pro

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. Nano Banana 2 Lite

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. Seedream 5.0 Pro

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. Grok Imagine Image Quality

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. FLUX.2 Max

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. Qwen Image 2.0 Pro

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. MAI-Image-2.5 Flash

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. HiDream-O1-Image-1.5

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. Krea 2 Medium Turbo

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. Seedream 4.0

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. Krea 2 Large

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. Luma UNI 1 Max

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. FLUX.2 Flex

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. Recraft V4.1 Utility

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. Ideogram 4.0

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. FLUX.2 Pro

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. HunyuanImage 3.0 Instruct

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. FLUX.2 Klein 9B

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. HiDream-O1-Image

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. Firefly Image Model 5

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. Midjourney V8.1

Wan 2.6 Text to Image vs. Stable Diffusion 3.5 Large

More models

Models from the same selection

All AI models

Ideogram 4.0

Ideogram

FLUX.2 Pro

Black Forest Labs

Evidence

Primary sources and data date

Every statement links to its underlying documentation or leaderboard.

AlibabaSource
Image pricingSource
Together AISource
LMArena (retrieved August 26, 2026)Source
GEBench (retrieved August 26, 2026)Source
Gradually-Bildtest (retrieved August 18, 2026)Source