FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo fal HiDream E1 HiDream AI

Settled by community votes across 4 shared challenges, with an AI judge weighing in on each.

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

27.9 arena score

#3 of 62 in Text-to-Image

Top 3 in Text-to-Image

Skill signature · Text-to-Image

HiDream E1

0.7 arena score

#33 of 32 in Image Editing

Vote tally

Where the votes landed

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

win rate

Ties

HiDream E1

win rate

Shared challenges 4

Challenge by challenge

The strongest take from each model on every shared challenge, with the AI judge's read.

Bald man challenge

Image Editing

Edit instruction

“Give the person a full, thick head of natural hair with realistic texture, density, and a natural hairline. Preserve facial features and lighting.”

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

HiDream E1

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

+ Excellent source preservation, keeping the face, clothing, and background almost entirely identical.
+ Realistic hair texture that matches the lighting and gritty aesthetic of the original image.
+ The hair blends naturally with the sideburns and forehead.

− The hairline is a bit high and rounded, giving it a slightly 'wig-like' silhouette.

HiDream E1

+ Successfully added a large volume of hair as requested.

− Significant source degradation, adding unnecessary texture/noise to the face and changing the background.
− The hair texture looks AI-generated and lacks the fine, realistic detail of the source beard.
− The glasses and clothing have been slightly modified and lost their original crispness.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo followed the editing instructions perfectly while maintaining the integrity of the original image's face, lighting, and background. In contrast, HiDream E1 modified the entire image's texture and background, resulting in a lower-quality output that failed the source preservation requirement.

Over-the-top cartoon caricature

Editing

Edit instruction

“Create a caricature of me and my job. Make it exaggerated and humorous, incorporating my profession as a tv show anchor and my love for dogs and hockey.”

Source

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

HiDream E1

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

+ Excellent caricature style that perfectly captures the subject's facial features.
+ Highly creative and detailed composition incorporating a news desk, hockey arena, and multiple dogs.
+ Great attention to detail in the background, showing dogs playing hockey on the TV screens.

− Text on the news desk is nonsensical gibberish.
− The style is more of a digital illustration than a traditional hand-drawn caricature.

HiDream E1

+ Successfully incorporates all elements: the person, a dog, and hockey players in the background.
+ Strong color palette that feels like a sports broadcast.

− The subject's face loses most of the resemblance to the source image, looking more like a generic 3D character.
− Anatomical issues with the hands, including an extra finger/joint on the left hand.
− The composition is much simpler and lacks the 'humorous' and 'exaggerated' flair of a professional caricature.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo is the clear winner as it maintains a much stronger facial resemblance to the source image while delivering a rich, humorous, and highly detailed caricature. HiDream E1 creates a more generic 3D character that loses the subject's identity and contains significant anatomical errors in the hands.

Studio Ghibli Anime Style

Editing

Edit instruction

“Transform this photo into a Studio Ghibli–inspired illustration. Use soft pastel colors, hand-painted textures, gentle lighting, dreamy backgrounds, and a warm, nostalgic mood”

Source

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

HiDream E1

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

+ Excellent adherence to the Studio Ghibli art style with soft textures and watercolor-like shading.
+ Highly accurate preservation of the source image's composition and character poses.
+ Effective use of pastel colors and dreamy background elements like cherry blossoms.

− The faces, while stylized, look slightly more like generic anime than a perfect Ghibli character design.

HiDream E1

+ Successfully translates the scene into a warm-toned illustration.
+ Preserves the spatial arrangement of the original photo.

− Art style is very generic clipart-style 2D rather than the requested Ghibli aesthetic.
− Significant loss of detail, such as the plaid pattern on the shirt.
− Character expressions and facial features feel flat and lack the requested 'nostalgic mood'.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo followed the prompt much more effectively, producing a high-quality illustration that captures the specific texture and atmosphere of a Studio Ghibli film while keeping the original 'distracted boyfriend' meme composition intact. HiDream E1 produced a much simpler, flatter cartoon style that failed to capture the hand-painted essence or the specific artistic style requested.

Golden Hour Stroll

Image Editing

Edit instruction

“Add dynamic motion to this photo: make hair blow in the wind, add leaves flying, energetic and lively feel.”

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

HiDream E1

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

+ Excellent preservation of the original person, dog, and background details.
+ Natural hair motion that flows symmetrically from the original hair position.
+ The flying leaves match the lighting and scale of the background environment.

− The sheer quantity of leaves feels slightly cluttered over the subjects' faces.

HiDream E1

+ Strong directional wind effect on the hair showing a clear wind path.
+ Added leaves are bold and easy to see.

− Significant loss of detail and facial likeness compared to the source image.
− The red leaves appear illustrative and do not match the botanical style of the background.
− Noticeable smoothing and 'AI-filter' look applied to the entire image.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo succeeded as an image editor by perfectly preserving the identity of the woman and the dog while adding believable motion. HiDream E1 failed to preserve the source image's quality and likeness, essentially re-generating a similar scene with a more plastic-like texture and cartoonish leaves.