Skip to main content

AlibabaVideo model matchup

Wan 2.6 R2V Flashvs.Lumos-1 3B SFT 384p

Neither Wan 2.6 R2V Flash nor Lumos-1 3B SFT 384p has an LMArena rating yet.

Longest clipSeconds per request
10 s

Wan 2.6 R2V Flash

n/a

Lumos-1 3B SFT 384p

Choose Wan 2.6 R2V Flash for

No clear advantage

Choose Lumos-1 3B SFT 384p for

runs locally

Where is the difference?

Longest clipNo clip length for Lumos-1 3B SFT 384p
ResolutionWan 2.6 R2V Flash higher1080p to 384p

Bar length shows the gap: for ratings full width from 60 points, for price from four times as much, for clip length from 20 seconds. Solid means clearly ahead, hatched slightly ahead, a thin grey bar level.

All data side by side

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

MetricWan 2.6 R2V FlashLumos-1 3B SFT 384p
Output
Resolution1080p384p
Longest clip10 sn/a
Soundgenerated by the modeln/ano
Access
Weightsn/aopen
Parametersn/a3B
RoutesAPIlocal
Releasedn/aMarch 2026
Statusavailableavailable

Prices: public API price of the documented standard configuration; resolution and sound can change it

Is there a better choice?

Best model for text to videoGemini Omni 1.1 Flash

Text to video 1,516, Place 1 of 23. $0.51 per 5 s clip.

Wan 2.6 R2V Flash vs. Gemini Omni 1.1 Flash

Sources and method

Show 2 sources and the method

Ratings come from the LMArena: people see two videos for the same prompt without knowing which model made them and pick the better one. Many such picks add up to a rating, higher is better. Text to video and image to video are separate lists and are never added together.

“Ahead” means one model stays clearly higher even with the rating’s uncertainty. “Slightly ahead” means its value is higher but the gap is not certain yet. Otherwise both count as level. Places count only the models of our comparison.

Prices and clip lengths come from the providers’ documentation. From a factor of 1.25 a model counts as cheaper or longer, below that as about the same.

Compare another matchup