Head to head
Esc

Models · slot A

to navigate to pick

Seedream 4.0 ByteDance Wan 2.6 Alibaba

Settled by community votes across 19 shared challenges, with an AI judge weighing in on each.

Seedream 4.0

24.7 arena score

#15 of 62 in Text-to-Image

Skill signature · Text-to-Image

Wan 2.6

23.3 arena score

#28 of 62 in Text-to-Image

Top 2 in Image-to-Video
Vote tally

Where the votes landed

Seedream 4.0

36.8%

win rate

Ties

10.5%

Wan 2.6

52.6%

win rate

36.8% 10.5% ties 52.6%
Shared challenges 19

Challenge by challenge

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

Geometric Composition

Text-to-Image

“A glass cube on a wooden table. Inside the cube is a small blue sphere. On top of the cube sits a red book. A green plant is behind the cube, partially visible through the glass. Soft window light from the left.”

Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Excellent adherence to the 'plant behind the cube visible through the glass' instruction.
  • + Clean, modern aesthetic with sharp reflections.
  • + Accurate cube geometry and balanced composition.
  • The sphere is slightly small relative to the volume of the cube.

Wan 2.6

  • + Beautiful texture on the red book and wooden table.
  • + Soft, realistic window lighting that matches the direction requested.
  • + High level of detail in the plant leaves.
  • The plant is positioned to the right-background rather than behind the cube, failing the 'visible through' instruction.
  • The glass cube has an illogical internal vertical line on the right side.

Verdict: Both models followed the majority of the instructions, but Seedream 4.0 is the clear winner for spatial accuracy, correctly placing the plant behind the cube so it is visible through the glass. While Wan 2.6 has superior textures on the book and table, it failed the specific spatial relationship requested for the plant and contains minor geometric artifacts in the glass.

Man and Car in California

Editing
Edit instruction

“Make a photo of the man driving the car down the California coastline”

Source
Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6
0% wins 0% ties 100% wins

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Perfectly preserves the specific features of the man including his hairstyle, scarf, and jacket pattern.
  • + Matches the car model and color with high accuracy to the source image.
  • + Captures the iconic Big Sur/California coastline aesthetic and motion blur on the road.
  • The steering wheel is positioned slightly too high relative to the driver's hands.

Wan 2.6

  • + Accurately depicts a California coastline with palm trees and cliffs.
  • + Maintains the car's model and color well.
  • Completely fails to preserve the man's identity; he is replaced by a generic figure in a hat.
  • The lighting on the front of the car feels slightly flat compared to the bright background.

Verdict: Seedream 4.0 is much better as it successfully integrated both source images, preserving the man's distinct hairstyle and clothing while placing the correct car in the requested environment. Wan 2.6 failed the image editing task by replacing the man with a different person who does not resemble the source image at all.

Candid Street Photography

Text-to-Image

“A candid street photo of an elderly Japanese man repairing a red bicycle in light rain, reflections on wet pavement, shallow depth of field, 50mm lens, natural skin texture, imperfect framing, motion blur from passing cars, cinematic but realistic, no stylization.”

Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Excellent depiction of motion blur with the passing car
  • + Strong pavement reflections and realistic puddle dynamics
  • + Effective use of the requested 'imperfect framing' for a candid feel
  • The bike anatomy is slightly warped, specifically the frame near the rear wheel
  • The man's skin texture is a bit smooth compared to the prompt's request for natural texture

Wan 2.6

  • + Superb skin texture on the face and hands, appearing very realistic
  • + Beautiful lighting and rain droplet physics on the man's jacket
  • + Cinematic color grading and sharp focus on the subject
  • The motion blur on the car in the background is less pronounced than requested
  • Composition is a bit more 'posed' rather than the requested 'imperfect framing'

Verdict: Both models followed the prompt well, but Wan 2.6 produced a significantly higher level of detail in the skin texture and rain effects on the clothing. Seedream 4.0 better captured the requested 'imperfect framing' and motion blur of the street scene, but the superior photographic quality of Wan 2.6 makes it the more impressive image.

Fantasy Warrior

Text-to-Image

“Close portrait of a battle-worn paladin in ornate engraved plate armor, hair braided with small beads, faint scars and dirt on the skin, warm torchlight reflecting off metal, shallow depth of field, bokeh sparks, lifelike eyes, highly detailed texture on leather straps and cloth underlayer.”

Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Excellent depiction of ornate engraving on the pauldrons.
  • + High quality rendering of skin texture and subtle scars.
  • + Strong adherence to the 'lifelike eyes' request with a piercing gaze.
  • The leather straps look a bit flat and less weathered than the character.
  • The torchlight effect is slightly overexposed in the background.

Wan 2.6

  • + Superb attention to detail on the leather straps and frayed cloth texture.
  • + The beads in the hair look more unique and integrated into the braid.
  • + Exceptional gritty atmosphere that fits the 'battle-worn' description perfectly.
  • The skin texture appears slightly more 'clumped' with dirt than natural scarring.
  • The eye on the right has a slightly unnatural reflection compared to the left.

Verdict: Both models performed exceptionally well, capturing the complexity of the armor and the specific atmospheric lighting. Wan 2.6 is slightly preferred for its superior rendering of the 'cloth underlayer' and 'leather straps' requested in the prompt, providing a more rugged and tactile feel, whereas Seedream 4.0 focuses more on the cleanliness of the engraving and facial features.

Modern Clean Menu

Text-to-Image

“Modern minimalist restaurant menu design, white background with colorful food photos in grid, sections for appetizers/pizza/mains, bold sans-serif fonts, vibrant accents, clean professional layout for casual dining.”

Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Perfectly legible section headers
  • + High-quality, appetizing food photography
  • + Clean white background
  • Lacks actual menu content like item names or prices
  • Layout is more of a collage than a functional menu design
  • Large empty white spaces feel unfinished

Wan 2.6

  • + Complete menu structure including item lists and pricing
  • + Excellent professional grid layout with vibrant color accents
  • + Strong adherence to the 'modern minimalist' aesthetic for casual dining
  • Text contains gibberish/hallucinated characters
  • Pizza is shown in the appetizers section
  • Mains section lacks corresponding photos in its immediate block

Verdict: Wan 2.6 provides a much more convincing and professional menu template that includes pricing, sections, and a clear design system, though the text is partially illegible. Seedream 4.0 creates a clean collage with perfect typography, but fails to actually design a functional menu beyond the primary section headers.

Magic Burger Explosion: Fiery Photorealism Challenge

Text-to-Image

“Ad for 'Magic Burger'. Dynamic, exploded burger with all components (bun, patty, cheese, lettuce, tomato, sauce) suspended in mid-air. Emphasize photorealistic detail and a sense of motion. Dark, fiery background with glowing embers. Integrate text: 'MAGIC BURGER' as a prominent title, 'LIMITED TIME ONLY' as a secondary message, and '€6.99' in a starburst, all rendered with a fiery, glowing effect.”

Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Excellent typography style with integrated flame effects
  • + Dynamic motion blur swirling around the ingredients
  • + Crisp, photorealistic texture on the bun and patty
  • Incorrect price displayed as €5.99 instead of €6.99
  • Duplicated the burger layers into two separate stacks instead of one exploded stack

Wan 2.6

  • + Perfect adherence to all text requirements including the correct price
  • + Excellent 'exploded' composition with sauce droplets and flying ingredients
  • + Rich atmospheric smoke and ember effects
  • The starburst graphic for the price looks a bit like a flat clip-art sticker
  • Slightly less 'glowing' effect on the secondary text compared to Model A

Verdict: Wan 2.6 is the clear winner as it followed all prompt instructions, including the specific price point of €6.99, whereas Seedream 4.0 changed the price to €5.99. Wan 2.6 also better captured the 'exploded' nature of the burger pieces, while Seedream 4.0 created a confusing double-burger composition.

Chalkboard Menu

Text-to-Image

“Handwritten-style chalkboard menu in a cozy café, all text rendered in the exact same realistic chalk handwriting style with natural variations in letter size, slight slant, and chalk texture — no printed or digital fonts anywhere on the board. Title at the top in elegant cursive chalk handwriting: ‘TODAY’S SPECIALS – APRIL 30, 2026’. Below it, three menu items also in the same handwritten chalk style: ‘Truffle Mushroom Risotto – $24’, ‘Grilled Octopus with Lemon & Herbs – $28’, ‘Brown Butter Chocolate Chip Cookies – $9’. At the very bottom, smaller text in the identical handwritten chalk style (slightly smaller but still clearly legible with the same handwriting characteristics): ‘All items made fresh daily • Ask about our gluten-free options’. Warm ambient café lighting, visible chalk dust and smudges, realistic handwriting imperfections, no clean printed text anywhere.”

Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Excellent adherence to the requested text content, including the full third menu item and footer.
  • + The chalk smears and erased background textures are very realistic.
  • + Strong clarity and high-resolution rendering of handwritten characters.
  • The date 'APRIL' lacks the elegant cursive requested in the prompt, appearing more blocky.
  • The composition is a bit tight on the left side of the frame.

Wan 2.6

  • + Beautifully executed 'elegant cursive' for the title as requested.
  • + Superb chalk texture with realistic dust gathered at the bottom ledge.
  • + Great depth of field and warm cafe atmosphere.
  • Fails to follow the specific text prompt for the third item, omitting 'Butter'.
  • Minor artifacts in the handwriting where strokes overlap slightly unnaturally.

Verdict: Both models performed exceptionally well with text rendering, but Seedream 4.0 followed the specific text instructions more accurately, including the full name of the third menu item. While it missed the cursive instruction for the date, Wan 2.1's omission of 'Butter' makes it less faithful to the prompt despite its superior artistic chalk textures and cursive execution.

The Reversed Rodeo

Text-to-Image

“Horse riding astronaut in space — horse on top, not vice versa. Surreal, highly detailed, cinematic.”

Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Strong cinematic lighting with high contrast
  • + Highly detailed textures on the spacesuit and horse
  • Fails the specific spatial prompt instruction of 'horse on top'
  • Anatomical issues with the horse's front legs appearing disconnected or strange

Wan 2.6

  • + Excellent composition and vibrant use of color in the nebulae
  • + Clearer, more balanced layout for a cinematic feel
  • Fails the specific spatial prompt instruction of 'horse on top'
  • Floating reins that lack physical logic behind the horse

Verdict: Both Seedream 4.0 and Wan 2.6 failed the negative constraint/spatial instruction to place the horse on top of the astronaut, choosing instead the conventional 'astronaut riding a horse' interpretation. Wan 2.6 is the preferred image because its composition is more dynamic, the colors are more striking, and the subject is better centered within the frame.

Outfit Transfer Challenge

Editing
Edit instruction

“Use Image 1 as the base person. Dress them in the exact elaborate outfit from Image 2 (including all layers, accessories, jewelry, and shoes). Carefully adapt the clothing to the body shape and pose in Image 1 while maintaining realistic fabric behavior, correct proportions, and perfect lighting/shadow matching. Keep the person’s exact face, hair, and background completely unchanged.”

Source
Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Successfully transferred almost the entire outfit including scarf, coat, jeans, and shoes.
  • + Adapts the clothing to a new upright pose successfully.
  • Failed to preserve the person's face, blending it with the person from Image 2 featuring a mustache and different sunglasses.
  • Changed the person's original vitiligo patterns into a generic textured skin effect.
  • Low-quality resolution with significant artifacts around the figure.

Wan 2.6

  • + Excellent preservation of the source person's face, features, and specific vitiligo patterns.
  • + Maintains the background and original lighting/composition of the first image perfectly.
  • + Clean visual quality with high resolution and no blurred artifacts.
  • Failed to include the entire outfit, providing only the upper half (coat and scarf).
  • The sunglasses were genericized rather than being a direct match for Image 2.

Verdict: Wan 2.6 is the clear winner because it successfully followed the core instruction to keep the person's face and features completely unchanged while adding the coat and scarf. Seedream 4.0 failed primarily as a source preservation tool, merging the faces of the two different individuals and losing the high-resolution details of the original photograph.

The Capybara Taxi Driver

Text-to-Image

“Photorealistic scene inside a yellow New York taxi at night. A capybara is driving, wearing a yellow taxi driver cap and a dark jacket. It has a calm, professional expression and both front paws on the steering wheel. In the back seat sits a human businesswoman in a coat, looking at her phone with a completely normal, bored expression (as if this is just another normal ride). Through the windows you can see the streets of Manhattan at night with blurred lights. Realistic taxi interior, photorealistic, detailed fur and fabric, 35mm lens, night lighting with reflections, shallow depth of field.”

Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Excellent photorealistic lighting and skin/fur textures
  • + Perfect composition showing depth between the driver and passenger
  • + Accurate depiction of the passenger's bored expression as requested
  • The cap is a basic baseball style rather than a traditional chauffeur/taxi cap

Wan 2.6

  • + High level of environmental detail with rain effects on the windshield
  • + Very detailed capybara facial features and whiskers
  • + Authentic taxi/law enforcement style hat adds to the character
  • The passenger is seated in the front or a very cramped middle position rather than the back seat
  • Anatomy of the capybara's hands/paws on the wheel is slightly messy

Verdict: Seedream 4.0 followed the spatial instructions much better, correctly placing the passenger in the back seat and capturing the requested 'bored' expression perfectly. While Wan 2.6 has impressive raining atmosphere and textures, it failed the composition prompt by placing the businesswoman right next to the driver.

The Halloween Invitation

Text-to-Image

“Vintage gothic Halloween party invitation. Dark parchment poster, spooky border with webs and thorns, central glowing jack-o-lantern, bats, twisted trees, moody night sky. Add elegant gothic title text saying "Halloween Party Invitation", a small scroll banner saying "You are invited to a night of frights", and event details at the bottom: Date: 30.10.2026 Time: 7pm Location: The Arches, NYC Spooky but polished, cinematic lighting, square format.”

Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Excellent atmospheric lighting with high-contrast shadows
  • + Coherent parchment-tear effect around the border
  • + Generally accurate text rendering for the event details
  • The text on the small scroll banner is slightly distorted and difficult to read
  • Composition is a bit cluttered at the bottom with the text overlapping parts of the frame

Wan 2.6

  • + Superb text clarity on both the main title and the small scroll banner
  • + Elegant, symmetrical composition with the trees framing the central Jack-o-lantern
  • + Highly detailed border work combining thorns, webs, and ornate frames
  • The 'glowing' effect from the pumpkin on the ground is slightly less realistic than in Model A

Verdict: Wan 2.6 is the superior choice because it achieved perfect legibility for all text elements, including the small scroll banner which Seedream 4.0 struggled with. Wan 2.6 also features a more balanced and professional layout that feels like a real invitation, whereas Seedream 4.0 has a more claustrophobic composition.

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.”

Before After
Seedream 4.0
Before After
Wan 2.6
25% wins 25% ties 50% wins

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Perfectly preserves facial features, clothing, and background
  • + Maintains identical lighting and grain texture from the original
  • + Matches the beard color and texture well
  • The hairline is unnaturally square and high
  • The hair volume is overly vertical and stiff-looking

Wan 2.6

  • + Produces a much more realistic and stylish hairstyle
  • + Excellent hair texture with natural-looking waves and flow
  • + Maintains the overall facial structure and environmental context
  • Slightly alters the shape of the glasses and the bridge of the nose
  • The ear is partially obscured and reshaped compared to the original

Verdict: Wan 2.6 provides a significantly more natural and aesthetically pleasing head of hair that feels integrated into the image, whereas Seedream 4.0 creates a stiff, boxy hairline that looks like a literal 'edit.' While Seedream 4.0 is better at preserving the exact geometry of the face and glasses, Wan 2.6 is the clear winner for its realistic texture and superior adherence to the core request of providing 'realistic texture' and a 'natural hairline'.

Isometric Miniature Diorama Scenes

Text-to-Image

“Create a clear, 45° top-down isometric miniature 3D cartoon scene of Japan's signature dish: sushi, with soft refined textures, realistic PBR materials, gentle lighting, on a small raised diorama base with minimal garnish and plate. Solid light blue background. At top-center: 'JAPAN' in large bold text, 'SUSHI' below it, small flag icon. Perfectly centered, ultra-clean, high-clarity, square format.”

Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Excellent text rendering and placement.
  • + High detail in the sushi textures, particularly the fish and roe.
  • + Soft, appealing 3D cartoon aesthetic that retains realism.
  • The diorama base is just a small tray rather than a distinct raised block.
  • Perspective is slightly flatter than the requested 45-degree angle.

Wan 2.6

  • + Captured the 'raised diorama base' instruction perfectly with the grey pedestal.
  • + Strong isometric perspective and clean composition.
  • + Includes additional garnish like ginger as requested.
  • The 'JAPAN' text is slightly off-center and awkwardly aligned with the icon.
  • The flag icon is integrated into the text line rather than being a separate small icon as requested.

Verdict: Seedream 4.0 produced a more visually appetizing and detailed set of sushi with superior typography, whereas Wan 2.6 better adhered to the 'diorama base' and layout requirements. Seedream 4.0 is preferred for its higher material quality and cleaner text, which better fits the 3D cartoon style requested.

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
Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6
0% wins 0% ties 100% wins

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Excellent character preservation while applying a classic bobblehead caricature style.
  • + Perfect integration of the original background and clothing from the source image.
  • + Includes all requested elements: anchor desk, dog, and hockey jersey details naturally.
  • The hand holding the phone has some anatomical issues with the thumb and finger spacing.

Wan 2.6

  • + Very clean, vibrant illustrative style.
  • + Clear and intentional placement of the hockey stick, puck, and dog.
  • + Strong 'TV Studio' lighting and composition.
  • Poor face preservation; the character looks like a generic cartoon and does not resemble the subject in the source image.
  • Complete loss of the source image's background and clothing.

Verdict: Seedream 4.0 is the clear winner for an image editing task because it successfully preserves the subject's identity and original environment while applying a distinct caricature effect. In contrast, Wan 2.6 generates a generic cartoon character from scratch, failing to maintain any recognizable traits from the provided source photo of the woman.

Adorable Baby Animals in Sunny Meadow

Text-to-Image

“Hyper-photorealistic scene of fluffy baby animals—a golden retriever puppy, tabby kitten, baby bunny, and red fox kit—with big expressive eyes and ultra-detailed soft fur, playfully chasing butterflies and tumbling together in a lush wildflower meadow, warm golden sunrise light with god rays and dew sparkles, joyful wholesome vibe, 8K masterpiece.”

Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Excellent dynamic posing that makes the animals look like they are actively tumbling
  • + Exceptional depiction of 'god rays' and dew sparkles as requested in the prompt
  • + High-contrast, vibrant colors that enhance the '8K masterpiece' feel
  • The fox's red fur is slightly oversaturated, bordering on unnatural
  • Minor floating artifacts in the sparkles above the kitten

Wan 2.6

  • + Features a white bunny which creates a nice focal point in the lower center
  • + Highly realistic textures on the kitten and puppy fur
  • + Beautiful morning mist effect in the background
  • The fox's anatomy is slightly awkward with a visible paw appearing detached
  • Composition feels a bit more static and posed compared to the 'tumbling' request

Verdict: Both models followed the complex prompt accurately, including all four specific animals. Seedream 4.0 is the winner due to its superior lighting effects (god rays and dew sparkles) and a more energetic composition that better captured the 'tumbling' and 'playful chasing' aspects of the prompt. Wan 2.6 produced a beautiful image but had minor anatomical flaws in the fox and a slightly less dynamic layout.

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
Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6
50% wins 0% ties 50% wins

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Perfectly captures the minimalist Studio Ghibli character design style.
  • + Beautiful watercolor texture and soft, hand-painted aesthetic.
  • + Accurately recreates the iconic expressions and poses from the source meme in the new style.
  • Completely loses the background detail, replacing it with abstract watercolor washes.
  • The character faces are very simplified compared to the source.

Wan 2.6

  • + Excellent preservation of the background architecture and details from the original photo.
  • + Maintains the facial likeness of the original people while stylizing them.
  • + Pleasant use of light and watercolor effects.
  • The art style leans more towards modern shoujo manga or generic watercolor illustration than specific Ghibli style.
  • Includes distracting white circular 'bokeh' or dust artifacts across the image.

Verdict: Seedream 4.0 delivers a much more authentic Studio Ghibli adaptation, capturing the specific simplified line work and watercolor feel associated with the studio, though it sacrifices the background detail. Wan 2.6 does a better job of preserving the composition and background of the original photo, but the character designs feel less like Ghibli and more like high-detail digital illustration.

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.”

Before After
Seedream 4.0
Before After
Wan 2.6
0% wins 0% ties 100% wins

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Successfully added brown flying leaves that match the dynamic feel
  • + Preserved the original composition and colors well
  • Noticeable loss of facial detail and slight identity shift
  • The hair edit looks a bit stiff and symmetrical

Wan 2.6

  • + Excellent hair motion that looks natural and windswept
  • + Very high source preservation with minimal identity shift
  • + High image clarity and sharpness
  • Flying leaves look somewhat like green digital artifacts or 'floating' rather than integrated
  • The motion of the leaves is less dynamic than requested

Verdict: Wan 2.6 is the superior model because it successfully adds natural-looking wind effects to the hair while maintaining perfect facial detail and identity compared to the source. While Seedream 4.0 does a better job with the brown falling leaves, it degrades the quality of the woman's face and creates a less realistic hair motion.

Vintage Cafe Logo

Text-to-Image

“Vintage minimalist restaurant logo for "Caffè Florian", retro cloche dome with steam and "Est. 1720" banner, classic typography, warm brown and cream tones, subtle texture on light background, vector emblem style.”

Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6
100% wins 0% ties 0% wins

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Perfect text rendering for both the main title and the banner.
  • + Excellent composition with a balanced emblem style.
  • + The subtle canvas-like texture perfectly matches the vintage request.
  • The accent on 'Caffè' is slightly stylized as a dot rather than a standard Italian accent mark.

Wan 2.6

  • + Clean vector aesthetic with good color choices.
  • + Successfully included all requested elements like the steam and cloche.
  • The banner placement is awkward and tiny, making the 'Est. 1720' text difficult to read.
  • Composition feels bottom-heavy compared to the more traditional circular logo layout.

Verdict: Seedream 4.0 followed the prompt much more effectively, creating a cohesive emblem with legible, well-placed text and a beautiful vintage texture. Wan 2.6 struggled with the banner placement and typography scaling, resulting in a less professional logo design.

Apollo 11: Journey to Tranquility

Text-to-Image

“Create a clean, modern vector infographic poster about the Apollo 11 mission. NASA-inspired palette (navy, white, muted red, light gray). Flat-vector style, crisp lines, consistent iconography, subtle gradients only. Steps (stop at landing): 1. Launch (Saturn Vicon) 2. Earth Orbit (Earth + orbit ring icon) 3. Translunar (trajectory arc icon) 4. Lunar Orbit (Moon + orbit ring icon) 5. Descent (lunar module descending icon) 6. Landing (lunar module on the surface icon) Small supporting elements (minimal text): • Crew strip: three silhouette icons with only last names: Armstrong, Aldrin, Collins. • Landing site marker: Moon pin labeled "Tranquility" only. Layout constraints: generous margins, large readable labels, clean background with subtle stars. Vector-only, print-poster look, high resolution.”

Seedream 4.0
Wan 2.6
100% wins 0% ties 0% wins

AI Judge Analysis

Seedream 4.0

  • + Excellent adherence to all 6 requested infographic steps with corresponding icons.
  • + Text rendering is highly accurate and readable for both the header and sub-points.
  • + Successfully incorporates the requested 'NASA-inspired' color palette and flat-vector style.
  • The transition from the navy sky to the gray ground is a bit harsh.
  • Some icons exhibit minor rendering artifacts (e.g., the lunar lander's legs).

Wan 2.6

  • + Clean, minimalist aesthetic that follows the requested color palette well.
  • + Good balance of negative space and crisp typography.
  • Completely failed to include the requested 6-step infographic content.
  • Omitted almost all specific icons requested (Saturn V, Earth, Trajectory, etc.).
  • The layout is too empty for an infographic poster.

Verdict: Seedream 4.0 followed the complex prompt instructions perfectly, providing all six chronological steps with appropriate icons and legible text. In contrast, Wan 2.6 failed the infographic requirements entirely, delivering a minimalist poster that lacked the core informational content requested.

Next steps

Explore each model