Compare
Grok Imagine 1.0 vs Pika V2.2
Grok Imagine 1.0 edges out Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video overall (Grok Imagine 1.0 59.0 vs Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video 26.0.) Grok Imagine is probably the best value model if you're not paying through the API. It scores quite highly in categories like prompt adherence and was one of the top animation models. Given xAI's generous tier, it holds its own with frontier model generations like Veo 3 and Kling at a fraction of the cost. It can still struggle with physics, and in rapid motion you sometimes see stuttering or inconsistent speed-ups and slow-downs. The main tradeoffs are in Physics accuracy, Rapid motion (stuttering, inconsistent speed), where Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video tends to score better.
Grok Imagine 1.0xai | Pika v2.2 Text-to-VideoPika |
|---|---|
Good for
| Good for
|
Bad for
| Bad for
|
Modalities
| Capability | Grok Imagine 1.0 | Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video |
|---|---|---|
| Text input | ||
| Image input | ||
| Video input | ||
| Audio input | — | — |
| Image output | ||
| Audio output | — | — |
Providers
Physics
How well the model simulates real-world physics: gravity, momentum, collisions, and natural movement.
Grok Imagine 1.0 leads on physics (+16.7), with a measurable advantage over Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video. The clearest separation is on Physics (+16.7). Across the other sub-metrics in this group, the gap is smaller but generally consistent with the overall direction. If physics is a priority for your prompts, Grok Imagine 1.0 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Grok Imagine 1.0 | Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video |
|---|---|---|
Prompt Comparisons
Physics
Prompt
Close-up: a match strikes, flares to life, lights a candle. The match head, the flame birth, the wick catching. Material accuracy across wood, phosphorus, wax, fire.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Physics
Prompt
Olympic swimmer jumps into a pool and swims a full lap and emerges from the water on the other side of the pool
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Prompt Adherence
Prompt
Inside an opulent royal greenhouse filled with orchids, a blue ceramic watering can sits in the foreground on the left, and a terracotta pot with a single red tulip sits in the foreground on the right. A shallow reflecting pond runs through the middle and must show clear reflections. At second 2, a hummingbird enters from the top center and hovers directly above the tulip for exactly three seconds, then exits upward at second 5. The watering can and pot must remain fixed.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Prompt and Logic
Measures how accurately the model follows prompts and maintains logical consistency throughout the video.
Grok Imagine 1.0 leads on prompt and logic (+31.5), with a measurable advantage over Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video. The clearest separation is on Logic Consistency (+41.2). Across the other sub-metrics in this group, the gap is smaller but generally consistent with the overall direction. If prompt and logic is a priority for your prompts, Grok Imagine 1.0 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Grok Imagine 1.0 | Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video |
|---|---|---|
Prompt Comparisons
Prompt Adherence
Prompt
Inside a gilded palace ballroom with tall mirrors and a marble floor, a gold crown sits on a red velvet cushion on a small round table in the foreground. A silver candlestick stands exactly to the right of the cushion. In the background, a crystal chandelier hangs centered above the room. At second 2 the chandelier sways gently left-to-right for exactly three seconds; at second 6 a gloved hand enters from the left and extinguishes only the rightmost candle on the candlestick. The crown and cushion must never move.”
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Prompt Adherence
Prompt
Action scene, cinematic and dynamic: A female lead in a dark tactical jacket sprints through a rain-soaked museum hall at night. The hall has three distinct landmarks: (1) a huge dinosaur skeleton on the left, (2) a glass display case with a glowing blue gem centered in the background, and (3) a marble staircase on the right.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Scene Consistency
Prompt
Single continuous shot in a dark planetarium exhibit. A mechanical orrery rotates smoothly: small planets circle a glowing central sun in repeating loops. The camera makes a slow arc around the orrery while the planets continue their motion.”
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Aesthetics
Visual quality including cinematography, artistic taste, and overall production value.
Grok Imagine 1.0 leads on aesthetics (+14.6), with a measurable advantage over Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video. The clearest separation is on Cinematography (+28.6). Across the other sub-metrics in this group, the gap is smaller but generally consistent with the overall direction. If aesthetics is a priority for your prompts, Grok Imagine 1.0 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Grok Imagine 1.0 | Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video |
|---|---|---|
Prompt Comparisons
Cinematography
Prompt
POV from inside a car trunk looking up at three figures who've just opened it. Wide lens, dramatic lighting from below, the perspective is specific and iconic.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Cinematography
Prompt
One-take chase: camera leads a woman sprinting through a crowded market, she's looking back in fear, we never see what's chasing her. Handheld urgency, motivated motion, ducking under obstacles.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Cinematography
Prompt
An epic done shot of a man riding a galloping horse across a vast barren landscape shot on a 35mm film camera. The camera follows him as he walks, the landscape is vast and the rider is small.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Animation
Performance on animated content styles including 2D, 3D, and anime-style animation.
Grok Imagine 1.0 leads on animation (+58.2), with a measurable advantage over Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video. The clearest separation is on 3D Animation (+68.0). Across the other sub-metrics in this group, the gap is smaller but generally consistent with the overall direction. If animation is a priority for your prompts, Grok Imagine 1.0 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Grok Imagine 1.0 | Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video |
|---|---|---|
Prompt Comparisons
2D Animation
Prompt
Golden age cartoon chaos 2D cel-shaded animation style: a coyote runs off a cliff, hangs in mid-air, holds up a tiny sign that says "HELP," then plummets. Classic timing, smear frames, dust cloud impact.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
2D Animation
Prompt
Hand-painted rotoscope: a ballerina performs fouettés, traced from live reference but stylized with ink outlines and watercolor fills. The motion is realistic but the look is distinctly illustrated.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
2D Animation
Prompt
Hand-drawn puppy 2D cel-shaded animation style: a golden retriever pup with floppy ears chases a butterfly through a meadow, trips over its own paws, rolls, and bounds up joyfully. Watercolor backgrounds, expressive line work, heartwarming motion.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Humans
Accuracy of human rendering including body proportions, hand details, and realistic actor performances.
Grok Imagine 1.0 leads on humans (+33.0), with a measurable advantage over Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video. The clearest separation is on Human (+41.3). Across the other sub-metrics in this group, the gap is smaller but generally consistent with the overall direction. If humans is a priority for your prompts, Grok Imagine 1.0 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Grok Imagine 1.0 | Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video |
|---|---|---|
Prompt Comparisons
Human
Prompt
A punk rock drummer absolutely destroys a kit, sticks blurring, head thrashing. Freeze for a moment on her mid-scream face, then resume chaos.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Human
Prompt
Cinematic slow-motion of a boxer throwing a punch at a heavy bag. Muscles contract in shoulders and arms, sweat flies, face shows exertion.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Human
Prompt
A woman practices yoga at sunrise on a cliff overlooking the ocean, flowing from warrior pose into a deep lunge. Wind catches her hair.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Objects and Animals
Quality of rendering inanimate objects and animals with accurate shapes, textures, and movements.
Grok Imagine 1.0 leads on objects and animals (+23.5), with a measurable advantage over Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video. The clearest separation is on Objects (+24.1). Across the other sub-metrics in this group, the gap is smaller but generally consistent with the overall direction. If objects and animals is a priority for your prompts, Grok Imagine 1.0 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Grok Imagine 1.0 | Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video |
|---|---|---|
Prompt Comparisons
Animals
Prompt
A wet dog shakes itself dry in glorious slow motion. Water droplets spiral off. Fur contorts into absurd shapes. Joy radiates from its face.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Animals
Prompt
Slow motion hummingbird: wings frozen mid-beat, iridescent throat catching light, tongue extending into a flower.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Animals
Prompt
Pod of orcas hunting in coordinated precision. Underwater ballet—sleek bodies, powerful flukes before they rise to the surface and leap into the air before splashing back down.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Text
Ability to render readable, accurate text and typography within generated videos.
Grok Imagine 1.0 leads on text (+63.0), with a measurable advantage over Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video. The clearest separation is on Text Fidelity (+63.0). Across the other sub-metrics in this group, the gap is smaller but generally consistent with the overall direction. If text is a priority for your prompts, Grok Imagine 1.0 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Grok Imagine 1.0 | Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video |
|---|---|---|
Prompt Comparisons
Text Fidelity
Prompt
Street-level Tokyo: kanji, hiragana, katakana everywhere. Shop signs, vending machines, posters we follow a woman walking down the street.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Scene Consistency
Prompt
Single continuous macro shot inside a watchmaker’s workshop. Extreme close-up of tweezers placing a tiny brass gear into a mechanical watch movement. The engraved markings on the gear remain crisp and identical frame-to-frame. The tweezers and gear never warp or change shape, and the camera motion is a smooth, slow push-in with no jitter. The gear teeth must not shimmer or crawl as it settles into place.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Scene Consistency
Prompt
Single continuous shot at a bright outdoor skatepark. A female skater in a red beanie and black hoodie rolls toward camera on a skateboard with a bold checkerboard deck graphic. The camera tracks alongside her smoothly. She performs one clean kickflip and lands it, continuing forward. The beanie, hoodie, and checkerboard graphic remain stable without flicker, and the board does not morph mid-air.”
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Cost and Speed
Practical factors including pricing per video and generation latency.
Grok Imagine 1.0 and Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video are effectively tied on cost and speed, with small tradeoffs across the metrics. The biggest separation is on Price / min (2.1), but it's not decisive overall. In practice, you should decide based on the specific sub-metric you care about most, since neither model consistently dominates this slice of the rubric.
| Metric | Grok Imagine 1.0 | Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video |
|---|---|---|
Prompt Comparisons
Hands
Prompt
Close up of a wrinkled elderly woman's weathered hands carefully folding an origami crane. Paper creases with each deliberate fold, fingers moving with practiced precision. Soft warm lighting, intimate macro detail.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
Hands
Prompt
A pianist's hands playing Chopin—arched wrists, curved fingers, striking keys with controlled force. We see both hands in frame, moving independently.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video
3D Animation
Prompt
Action-adventure CG: a fierce Viking warrior rides a dragon through a narrow sea stack canyon at high speed. Braided beard and fur cloak whipping in the wind, dragon wings tucking and flaring. Dynamic camera, motion blur, cinematic framing.
Grok Imagine 1.0
vs
Pika v2.2 Text-to-Video