Swipe for more top models
Compare
Grok Imagine 1.0 vs Veo 3
Veo 3 edges out Grok Imagine 1.0 overall (Grok Imagine 1.0 58.0 vs Veo 3 60.0.) Veo 3 is an incredible model that proves Google is leading the pack in cinematic generations. It's great for cinematography and has built-in audio capability. It can struggle with logical worldbuilding on more creative camera requests, but most of the time it does quite well. Where it takes a step back: actor performances weren't as good as Veo 2, and the output has a glossier look. Veo 2 had more cinematic taste. Image-to-video tasks also struggle more than prior models. The main tradeoffs are in Actor performances, Logical worldbuilding, Has a glossy aesthetic, Image-to-video tasks, where Grok Imagine 1.0 tends to score better.
Grok Imagine 1.0xai | Veo 3Google |
|---|---|
Good for
| Good for
|
Bad for
| Bad for
|
Modalities
| Capability | Grok Imagine 1.0 | Veo 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Text input | ||
| Image input | ||
| Video input | ||
| Audio input | ||
| Image output | ||
| Audio output |
Providers
Provider
xai
xAI
xai is the platform that serves Grok Imagine 1.0 requests, pricing, and availability.
Provider
Google
google-veo
Google is the platform that serves Veo 3 requests, pricing, and availability.
Physics
How well the model simulates real-world physics: gravity, momentum, collisions, and natural movement.
Veo 3 leads on physics (+17.8), with a measurable advantage over Grok Imagine 1.0. The clearest separation is on Physics (+17.8). 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, Veo 3 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Grok Imagine 1.0 | Veo 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Physics | 40.4 | 58.2 |
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 (+3.4), with a measurable advantage over Veo 3. The clearest separation is on Scene Consistency (+15.8). 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 | Veo 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Prompt Adherence | 66.7 | 54.0 |
| Logic Consistency | 66.7 | 53.2 |
| Scene Consistency | 54.9 | 70.7 |
Aesthetics
Visual quality including cinematography, artistic taste, and overall production value.
Grok Imagine 1.0 leads on aesthetics (+2.4), with a measurable advantage over Veo 3. The clearest separation is on Cinematography (+4.8). 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 | Veo 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Cinematography | 60.7 | 55.9 |
| Taste | — | — |
| Quality | 0.7 | 0.6 |
Animation
Performance on animated content styles including 2D, 3D, and anime-style animation.
Grok Imagine 1.0 leads on animation (+17.0), with a measurable advantage over Veo 3. The clearest separation is on 3D Animation (+21.0). 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 | Veo 3 |
|---|---|---|
| 2D Animation | 71.7 | 53.0 |
| 3D Animation | 85.0 | 64.0 |
| Anime Animation | 61.0 | 49.7 |
Humans
Accuracy of human rendering including body proportions, hand details, and realistic actor performances.
Grok Imagine 1.0 leads on humans (+13.2), with a measurable advantage over Veo 3. The clearest separation is on Actor Performance (+19.0). 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 | Veo 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Human | 65.6 | 54.7 |
| Hands | 59.7 | 50.0 |
| Actor Performance | 64.0 | 45.0 |
Objects and Animals
Quality of rendering inanimate objects and animals with accurate shapes, textures, and movements.
Veo 3 leads on objects and animals (+11.3), with a measurable advantage over Grok Imagine 1.0. The clearest separation is on Objects (+12.9). 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, Veo 3 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Grok Imagine 1.0 | Veo 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Objects | 54.7 | 67.6 |
| Animals | 53.6 | 63.3 |
Text
Ability to render readable, accurate text and typography within generated videos.
Grok Imagine 1.0 leads on text (+26.3), with a measurable advantage over Veo 3. The clearest separation is on Text Fidelity (+26.3). 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 | Veo 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Text Fidelity | 69.0 | 42.7 |
Cost and Speed
Practical factors including pricing per video and generation latency.
Grok Imagine 1.0 leads on cost and speed (+286.4), with a measurable advantage over Veo 3. The clearest separation is on Latency (+850.0). Across the other sub-metrics in this group, the gap is smaller but generally consistent with the overall direction. If cost and speed is a priority for your prompts, Grok Imagine 1.0 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Grok Imagine 1.0 | Veo 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Price / sec | $0.050 | $0.200 |
| Price / min | $3.00 | $12.00 |
| Latency | 0ms | 850ms |