Professional photography studio setup with multiple screens displaying different AI generated videos. Modern editing desk with dual monitors. High end camera equipment visible in background. Shot on Canon EOS R5, 50mm lens, f2.8, dramatic studio lighting.
Created using Ideogram 2.0 Turbo with the prompt, "Professional photography studio setup with multiple screens displaying different AI generated videos. Modern editing desk with dual monitors. High end camera equipment visible in background. Shot on Canon EOS R5, 50mm lens, f2.8, dramatic studio lighting."

Top 10 AI Model Video Comparison

Prompt: “A product video, quick fast-moving shot of an avocado armchair, studio lighting, cuts”

1. Kling 1.0:

Cost: FREE!!!

Quality: 9/10 – Very Coherent. No complaints really.

Prompt Adherence: 8/10 – Good, though I specifically asked for cuts and fast motion, so could be better.

Notes: I only have this above Sora because it’s free and that Kling did better than usual here, and Sora slightly underperformed. On average I think Sora would win.

2. Sora:

Cost: Came with my ChatGPT Plus Subscription

Quality: 8.8/10 – Top of the line today, but weird rotation and room for improvement. Physics need work.

Prompt Adherence: 8.2/10 – Good, though I specifically asked for cuts and angles, so could be better.

3. Minimax:

Cost: FREE!!!

Quality: 8/10 – Consistent, but two chairs, and not high motion. Not an exciting shot.

Prompt Adherence: 6.5/10 – Studio, but not dynamic enough.

4. Vidu 1.0:

Cost: FREE!!!

Quality: 8.8/10 – Despite the noticeable artifacting, this video is extremely dynamic, and looks the most like it was taken by a real person. This does lose some points in the prompt adherence section though, because I did ask for a studio product shot. The double chairs is a problem too, but I love the vibes here!

Prompt Adherence: 7.2/10 – More human than studio-type shot, and the chairs could look more avocado-y.

Notes: I ran this test on Vidu 1.5 but it did worse so I didn’t include it in this top ten. It did beat Pika and Hunyuan though of course.

5. Runway Gen-3:

Cost: 25 Cents

Quality: 5/10 – Ok. Weird motion reversal. It’s a bit cartoony, but I had to use a Flux starting image, so not entirely Runway’s fault.

Prompt Adherence: 6.5/10 – It’s fine. Weird motion and no cut angles though.

6. Kling 1.5:

Cost: FREE!!!

Quality: 5.5/10 – It did worse than Kling 1.0 somehow. Very similar to Haiper actually.

Prompt Adherence: 5.5/10 – A little better than Haiper, but still not the kind of shot I was going for.

7. Haiper 2.0:

Cost: 16 Cents

Quality: 5/10 – Ok but nowhere near top competitors.

Prompt Adherence: 5/10 – Meh. Not avocado-shaped, but colored correctly. Not the kind of shot I was going for.

8. Mochi 1:

Cost: FREE!

Quality: 4.5/10 – VERY Morphy

Prompt Adherence: 5/10 – Meh. Not avocado-shaped, but fastest which is nice.

9. Hunyuan:

Cost: 40 Cents

Quality: 7/10 – Morphing, and clearly not what I was looking for but the quality itself was way better than Pika.

Prompt Adherence: 2/10 – It barely included avocados, but the cuts and how dynamic the shot was were ok.

10. Pika 1.5:

Cost: Part of an $8 a month subscription

Quality: 3/10 – Almost motionless

Prompt Adherence: 4/10 – None of the motion I asked for was there. Neatly static. The chair is ok though.