Video model comparison
Seedance 2.5 vs Veo 3.1
Two flagship video models with genuinely different shapes: one stretches to thirty seconds and carries fifty references, the other renders eight seconds you can reproduce exactly. This is what separates them, and when each one is the right call.
Every figure below is read from the same model registry Imgo routes against, so the table cannot drift from what the API accepts.
Side by side
| Capability | Seedance 2.5 | Veo 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Clip length | 5 / 10 / 15 / 20 / 25 / 30s | 4 / 6 / 8s |
| Resolution | 720p / 1080p / 4K | 720p / 1080p / 4K |
| Aspect ratios | 16:9, 9:16, 1:1, 4:3, 3:4, 21:9 | 16:9, 9:16 |
| Start / end frame | Yes | Yes |
| Reference images | 50 | 3 |
| Reference video | Yes | No |
| Native audio | Yes | Yes |
| Reproducible seed | No | Yes |
Choose Seedance 2.5 when…
The shot runs past eight seconds, the same source has to produce vertical and square cuts, or a character and product must stay recognisable across every scene. Fifty reference slots and reference-video input are the reason.
Choose Veo 3.1 when…
The shot is short and has to look expensive, or the result has to be reproducible. It is the only one of the two with a seed, so a take you approve today renders the same way next quarter.
Two constraints worth knowing first
- Veo renders eight seconds whenever the output is 1080p or 4K, or whenever the run starts from a frame — whatever duration was requested. Budget for eight at those settings.
- Veo accepts an end frame only alongside a start frame. Sending an end frame on its own is a request-shape error, not a fallback.
Send one prompt to both
Picking a video model usually means integrating one and living with it, because rewiring a pipeline costs more than the model choice ever saves. In Imgo the model is a field: send the same prompt to both, watch the two takes side by side, and keep whichever the shot needed — one integration, one credit balance.