🎁 New Sign up free, 10 calls on us. Up to $1, no card needed.

gemini-3.1-flash-lite-image vs wan2.7-image-pro

vs

Which one, when — curated verdict, not a benchmark table

These two bill in different units — gemini-3.1-flash-lite-image charges per token ($0.25 per million in, $30 per million out) while wan2.7-image-pro charges $0.075 per call — so no single conversion is honest and you should compare on your own average request shape. Pick gemini-3.1-flash-lite-image when you want text back alongside images from text or image input, with a 4096-token output ceiling and a 2025-01 knowledge cutoff. Pick wan2.7-image-pro for pure image-out generation where flat per-call pricing makes costs predictable regardless of prompt length.

Pricing

gemini-3.1-flash-lite-image wan2.7-image-pro Δ
Per generated image $0.075
Input / 1M tokens $0.25
Output / 1M tokens $30

These two models bill in different units, so no Δ is shown — converting between them would require an assumption we have not measured. Each card is listed in its own unit above.

Specs

gemini-3.1-flash-lite-image wan2.7-image-pro
Input modalities text image text image
Output modalities text image image
Released 2026-06-30 2026-04-01
Knowledge cutoff 2025-01
Output sizes 1K only (1:1 = 1024x1024)
  • 1K (1024x1024)
  • 2K (2048x2048, default)
  • 4K (4096x4096, text-to-image only)
  • custom WxH (t2i 768x768 – 4096x4096; editing/sets 768x768 – 2048x2048, ratio 1:8–8:1)
Input modes text-to-image, interleaved generation + editing, up to 14 reference images text-to-image, image editing (incl. bounding-box interactive edit), 0–9 reference images, text/image-to-image-set
Images per request 12
Formats png
Notes

1K (1024px) output only

10 aspect ratios (1:1, 3:2, 2:3, 3:4, 4:3, 4:5, 5:4, 9:16, 16:9, 21:9) and up to 14 reference images

interleaved generation and editing with fast multi-turn local edits

sub-2s end-to-end latency

SynthID + C2PA watermarking always on

4K text-to-image (max 4096x4096; editing max 2K), aspect ratios 1:8-8:1

instruction + click-to-edit editing

character-consistent sets up to 12 images

print-quality text rendering incl. formulas/tables

Specs are transcribed from each vendor’s documentation; a row a vendor does not publish is left out rather than inferred. Full sources: gemini-3.1-flash-lite-image · wan2.7-image-pro

One prompt, both models — measured through the gateway

PROMPT A weathered enamel diner mug on a steel counter, the words "OPEN 24H" stencilled on the mug in worn paint, low winter sun raking in from the left, shallow depth of field.

gemini-3.1-flash-lite-image

gemini-3.1-flash-lite-image: A weathered enamel diner mug on a steel counter, the words "OPEN 24H" stencilled on the mug in worn paint, low winter sun raking in from the left, shallow depth of field.

Model returned 1408×768 latency 3 s

wan2.7-image-pro

wan2.7-image-pro: A weathered enamel diner mug on a steel counter, the words "OPEN 24H" stencilled on the mug in worn paint, low winter sun raking in from the left, shallow depth of field.

Model returned 1024×1024 latency 25 s

One prompt, one request per model, no retries and no cherry-picking — the first result each model returned. Neither size nor duration was pinned: each model used its own default, because a request shaped to fit all of them would flatter none. Files here are re-encoded for the web, so judge composition and prompt adherence, not compression.

Switch between them with one line

Both ids are in every tab below — the highlighted pair of lines is the only edit. Same endpoint, same key, same request shape.

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
    api_key="sk-syn-...",
)

resp = client.images.generate(
    model="gemini-3.1-flash-lite-image",
    # model="wan2.7-image-pro",  # uncomment this line, comment the one above
    prompt="a watercolor lighthouse at dawn",
    size="1024x1024",
)
print(resp.data[0].b64_json[:80])

Get an API key →

FAQ

Which is cheaper, gemini-3.1-flash-lite-image or wan2.7-image-pro?

They bill in different units, so there is no single honest number: gemini-3.1-flash-lite-image and wan2.7-image-pro each appear in their own unit in the table above. Compare them on your own workload — the practical trade-off is described in the verdict at the top of this page.

Can I A/B test gemini-3.1-flash-lite-image against wan2.7-image-pro without two integrations?

Yes. Both are served through the same OpenAI-compatible endpoint with one API key — switching is a one-line model-string change, so you can route a fraction of traffic to each and compare bills directly.

Does the price change with image size?

It depends on how the model bills. Per-image models charge the same regardless of prompt or output size; token-billed models scale with the resolution you render, so a 4K image costs a multiple of a small one. The table above shows which applies to each.

Related comparisons