Skip to main content

Direct comparison

Dreamina Seedance 2.5 720p vs. Runway Gen-4.5

Compare the exact model versions across shared blind-preference benchmarks, public pricing, release dates, resolution, duration, native audio, access, and model availability.

Overview

Technical specifications and pricing

Technical limits come from model or API documentation. A representative minute price appears only when it can be traced to the exact model. Different resolutions and audio settings may still affect the final charge.

Specifications and pricing for Dreamina Seedance 2.5 720p and Runway Gen-4.5
AttributeDreamina Seedance 2.5 720pRunway Gen-4.5
ProviderByteDanceRunway
ReleasedJuly 31, 2026December 2025
AccessWeb appWeb app
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
ParametersNot publishedNot published
Maximum resolution720p720p
Maximum duration30 s10 s
Native audioYesNot published
Representative API priceNot publishedNot published
LifecycleNo separate noticeNo separate notice
Technical sourceModel sourceVerified 2026-08-24Model sourceVerified 2026-08-24

Performance

Shared video benchmarks

A row appears only when both exact model versions occur in the same LMArena task and stored dataset revision. Text-to-video and image-to-video are never merged into one score.

Dreamina Seedance 2.5 720pRunway Gen-4.5
LMArena Text to VideoBlind preference rating from the same task and dataset revision
Dreamina Seedance 2.5 720pHigher value1,477
Runway Gen-4.51,222.7

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Shared video benchmarks for Dreamina Seedance 2.5 720p and Runway Gen-4.5
BenchmarkDreamina Seedance 2.5 720pRunway Gen-4.5Source
LMArena Text to Video
Higher rating1,477Rank 4, 95% interval 1,457.7 to 1,496.2, 1,337 votes
1,222.7Rank 24, 95% interval 1,213.2 to 1,232.3, 38,795 votes
LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26

Higher rating is better. A clear lead is shown only when the published 95% intervals do not overlap.

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Visual comparison

Sample videos

Only runs from both exact model versions under the same archived prompt and first-output rule appear here. Provider showcases and substitute versions remain excluded.

Controlled practical comparison. Both exact model versions received the same archived prompt in one request. The first output counts. Playback uses the first five seconds, 1280 × 720 pixels, 30 fps, no crop, and muted audio. Provider-side randomness and prompt processing remain model characteristics.

Motion and physical consistency

Anatomy, object consistency, camera tracking, rain, and reflections

Dreamina Seedance 2.5 720p

Run details

fal.ai. bytedance/seedance-2.5/text-to-video. 16:9, one request, first output, requested 5 s, seed 587599925, request {"prompt":"Generate exactly one continuous five-second 16:9 cinematic video. A fictional bicycle courier in a mustard-yellow raincoat rides a red city bicycle from left to right across a rain-wet Hamburg street at blue hour for the entire clip. The camera tracks her smoothly at waist height. Both hands remain visible on the handlebars, the bicycle geometry stays physically correct, and a transparent umbrella fixed to the bicycle moves naturally in the wind. Wet-street reflections and raindrops follow realistic physics. No cuts, no slow motion, no text, no logos, no subtitles, and no audio.","resolution":"720p","duration":"5","aspect_ratio":"16:9","generate_audio":false}, configured price estimate $2.31.

Generated Aug 24, 2026. Source

Runway Gen-4.5

Run details

OpenRouter. runway/gen-4.5. 16:9, one request, first output, requested 5 s, request {"model":"runway/gen-4.5","prompt":"Generate exactly one continuous five-second 16:9 cinematic video. A fictional bicycle courier in a mustard-yellow raincoat rides a red city bicycle from left to right across a rain-wet Hamburg street at blue hour for the entire clip. The camera tracks her smoothly at waist height. Both hands remain visible on the handlebars, the bicycle geometry stays physically correct, and a transparent umbrella fixed to the bicycle moves naturally in the wind. Wet-street reflections and raindrops follow realistic physics. No cuts, no slow motion, no text, no logos, no subtitles, and no audio.","aspect_ratio":"16:9","duration":5,"resolution":"720p","generate_audio":false}, live estimated cost $0.6000, actual cost $0.6000.

Generated Aug 24, 2026. Source

Prompt and integrity hashes

Generate exactly one continuous five-second 16:9 cinematic video. A fictional bicycle courier in a mustard-yellow raincoat rides a red city bicycle from left to right across a rain-wet Hamburg street at blue hour for the entire clip. The camera tracks her smoothly at waist height. Both hands remain visible on the handlebars, the bicycle geometry stays physically correct, and a transparent umbrella fixed to the bicycle moves naturally in the wind. Wet-street reflections and raindrops follow realistic physics. No cuts, no slow motion, no text, no logos, no subtitles, and no audio.

Prompt SHA 256: 206a9182584e93790fd6df608e8a2065fe2c8f747e85aeaaf4c8ea84040e6299

Dreamina Seedance 2.5 720p, Original SHA 256: 12da4d1096e9541d061b507f4db64b60af772193e92c941daea4bb3d7f8c9b42

Dreamina Seedance 2.5 720p, Normalized SHA 256: 51da692edda1df281ba5175aba92eee3de40d5389a031c1510450c5de088f5b1

Runway Gen-4.5, Original SHA 256: 078e97214f6ee9e69822040de35382a0bbfb0633ff249a18ab8e6077dcbe97a1

Runway Gen-4.5, Normalized SHA 256: 6d7b1012a027e875540a436be9a0168a29dd34280a31eeb1693987a5ab4156f2

How to read the data

Preference is not the same as production fit

A higher LMArena rating means that outputs from this exact configuration were preferred more often in blind comparisons.

Motion control, identity consistency, audio, turnaround time, moderation, and licensing may matter more than the aggregate preference rating.

Prices are representative public minute rates, not a normalized cost benchmark.

More matchups

Related video model comparisons

Compare Dreamina Seedance 2.5 720p and Runway Gen-4.5 with other important video models using the same benchmark logic.

View the complete video model comparison