Megaton
Megaton
#1
ByteDanceSeedance 2.0
#2
ByteDanceSeedance 2.0 Fast
#3
AlibabaHappyHorse-1.0
#3
KlingKling 3 Pro
#5
GoogleVeo 3

Swipe for more top models

AI video model comparison

Grok Imagine 1.0 vs Veo 3.1 Fast

By Megaton TeamJuly 22, 2026

Grok Imagine 1.0 is the better overall choice over Veo 3.1 Fast. It scores higher in most quality categories shown and costs less.

Share
Grok Imagine 1.0
Veo 3.1 Fast

“Try” links may be affiliate links — Megaton may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. Learn more.

Our verdict

Grok Imagine 1.0 is the better choice

Grok Imagine 1.0 scores higher than Veo 3.1 Fast in most quality categories shown. Its biggest lead is in 3D animation, and it also costs less.

xAI

xAI

Grok Imagine 1.0

58.0Overall score
Rank
#7
Price per minute
$4.20/min
Google DeepMind

Google DeepMind

Veo 3.1 Fast

51.0Overall score
Rank
#13
Price per minute
$6.00/min

Best for

Highest overall score

Grok Imagine 1.0

Grok Imagine 1.0 leads the overall score by 7.0 points.

The overall score does not measure file reliability.

Best for

More readable text

Grok Imagine 1.0

Grok Imagine 1.0 leads by 21.3 points.

Long or moving text still needs manual review.

Best for

Lower generation cost

Grok Imagine 1.0

Grok Imagine 1.0 runs $4.20/min, against $6/min for Veo 3.1 Fast.

Provider prices can change.

Best for

Built-in audio

Veo 3.1 Fast

Veo 3.1 Fast generates audio with the video; Grok Imagine 1.0 does not.

This comparison does not score audio quality.

162
videos rated
4,698
measurements
648
ratings
July 22, 2026
last updated

Reviewer scores

Scores by category

Grok Imagine 1.0 wins 10 of 14 categories head-to-head. Each bar is the reviewer score out of 100.

Biggest gap3D Animation: Grok Imagine 1.0 ahead by 70.0 points.
Closest categoryAnimals: Veo 3.1 Fast ahead by 1.6 points.

Head-to-head scores

14 categories rated head-to-head

Grok Imagine 1.0Veo 3.1 Fast
Physics
40.4
45.7
Prompt Adherence
66.7
44.0
Logic Consistency
66.7
41.5
Scene Consistency
54.9
50.7
Cinematography
60.7
53.4
2D Animation
71.7
27.7
3D Animation
85.0
15.0
Anime Animation
61.0
54.3
Human
65.6
55.3
Hands
59.7
77.3
Actor Performance
64.0
56.3
Objects
54.7
57.6
Animals
53.6
55.1
Text Fidelity
69.0
47.7

Technical reliability

How reliably does each model deliver clean video?

These checks look for freezes, bad framing, compression problems, and unstable motion. They are kept separate from the reviewer scores above.

Grok Imagine 1.0
41 videos rated · Jul 2026
Veo 3.1 Fast
121 videos rated · Jul 2026

File reliability checks

Playback, framing, and motion stability

Grok Imagine 1.0Veo 3.1 Fast

Grok Imagine 1.0's biggest lead: Clean framing, 98.0% versus 92.0%.

Veo 3.1 Fast's biggest lead: Motion stability, 57.0 versus 20.0.

Technical cleanliness
61.0%
74.0%

Clips with no freezes, bad framing, or severe compression problems.

Freeze-free playback
95.0%
93.0%

Clips that play without stalls or frozen frames.

Clean framing
98.0%
92.0%

Clips without unexpected black bars or cropped edges.

Motion stability
20.0
57.0

How consistently surfaces hold their shape and texture while moving.

Edge stability
51.0
78.0

How consistently object outlines remain clean while moving.

Side-by-side video tests

Same prompt, side by side

Both videos in each row were generated from the prompt shown. Watch them side by side to compare how each model handled the same request.

Video test 1

Text

Spelling, letter shape, spacing, and whether the words remain stable while the scene moves.

Related category score

Grok Imagine 1.0 leads here by 21.3 points.

Show the full prompt

Street-level Tokyo: kanji, hiragana, katakana everywhere. Shop signs, vending machines, posters we follow a woman walking down the street.

Text videos generated from the same prompt by Grok Imagine 1.0 and Veo 3.1 Fast
Grok Imagine 1.0
Veo 3.1 Fast

Video test 2

Physics

Weight, contact, momentum, and whether objects continue to behave consistently from frame to frame.

Related category score

Veo 3.1 Fast leads here by 5.4 points.

Show the full 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.

Physics videos generated from the same prompt by Grok Imagine 1.0 and Veo 3.1 Fast
Grok Imagine 1.0
Veo 3.1 Fast

Video test 3

Cinematography

Framing, camera movement, lighting continuity, and whether the visual treatment follows the prompt.

Related category score

Grok Imagine 1.0 leads here by 7.3 points.

Show the full 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.

Cinematography videos generated from the same prompt by Grok Imagine 1.0 and Veo 3.1 Fast
Grok Imagine 1.0
Veo 3.1 Fast

Capabilities

Inputs and outputs

See full Grok Imagine 1.0 detailsSee full Veo 3.1 Fast details
CapabilityGrok Imagine 1.0Veo 3.1 Fast
Text inputYesYes
Image inputYesYes
Video inputYesYes
Audio inputNoNo
Image outputNoNo
Audio outputNoYes

FAQ

Common questions

Is Grok Imagine 1.0 better than Veo 3.1 Fast?

Grok Imagine 1.0 is better overall and leads most quality categories.

Is Grok Imagine 1.0 cheaper than Veo 3.1 Fast?

Grok Imagine 1.0 costs less at $4.20 per minute, compared with $6 for Veo 3.1 Fast.

Does Grok Imagine 1.0 generate audio?

No, Grok Imagine 1.0 does not include audio output.

Does Veo 3.1 Fast generate audio?

Yes, Veo 3.1 Fast includes audio output.

Which model makes longer clips, Grok Imagine 1.0 or Veo 3.1 Fast?

Grok Imagine 1.0 supports longer clips at 15 seconds, compared with 8 seconds for Veo 3.1 Fast.

Which model scores higher on 3D Animation, Grok Imagine 1.0 or Veo 3.1 Fast?

Grok Imagine 1.0 scores higher for 3D animation.

Which model scores higher on 2D Animation, Grok Imagine 1.0 or Veo 3.1 Fast?

Grok Imagine 1.0 scores higher for 2D animation.

How are Grok Imagine 1.0 and Veo 3.1 Fast compared?

Megaton gives both models the same prompts and compares the resulting videos. Price, audio support, and maximum clip length are also checked.

More comparisons

More AI video model comparisons

Browse more head-to-head results, including scores, prices, and side-by-side video tests.

Other AI video model comparison pages
ComparisonProvidersOverall scores
Seedance 2.0 vs Grok Imagine 1.0ByteDancexai73.0 / 58.0
Kling 3 Pro vs Grok Imagine 1.0Klingxai62.0 / 58.0
Kling 2.6 vs Grok Imagine 1.0Klingxai60.0 / 58.0
Veo 3 vs Grok Imagine 1.0Googlexai60.0 / 58.0
Seedance 2.0 vs Veo 3.1 FastByteDanceGoogle73.0 / 51.0
Grok Imagine 1.0 vs Veo 2xaiGoogle58.0 / 56.0
Grok Imagine 1.0 vs Veo 3.1xaiGoogle58.0 / 56.0
Kling 3 Pro vs Veo 3.1 FastKlingGoogle62.0 / 51.0
Grok Imagine 1.0 vs PixVerse v5.5xaiPixVerse58.0 / 55.0
Grok Imagine 1.0 vs Grok 2025xaixai58.0 / 54.0
Kling 2.6 vs Veo 3.1 FastKlingGoogle60.0 / 51.0
Veo 3 vs Veo 3.1 FastGoogleGoogle60.0 / 51.0
Grok Imagine 1.0 vs Seedance 1.5 ProxaiByteDance58.0 / 53.0
Grok Imagine 1.0 vs Sora 2 ProxaiOpenAI58.0 / 50.0
Veo 2 vs Veo 3.1 FastGoogleGoogle56.0 / 51.0
Veo 3.1 vs Veo 3.1 FastGoogleGoogle56.0 / 51.0
Grok Imagine 1.0 vs Veo 3 FastxaiGoogle58.0 / 48.0
Grok Imagine 1.0 vs Vidu Q2xaiVidu58.0 / 45.0
PixVerse v5.5 vs Veo 3.1 FastPixVerseGoogle55.0 / 51.0
Grok 2025 vs Veo 3.1 FastxaiGoogle54.0 / 51.0
Grok Imagine 1.0 vs LTX-2 19BxaiLightricks58.0 / 43.0
Grok Imagine 1.0 vs Gen-4.5xaiRunway58.0 / 40.0
Seedance 1.5 Pro vs Veo 3.1 FastByteDanceGoogle53.0 / 51.0
Grok Imagine 1.0 vs Pika v2.2 Text-to-VideoxaiPika58.0 / 26.0
Grok Imagine 1.0 vs Infinity StarxaiFoundationVision58.0 / 24.0
Veo 3.1 Fast vs Sora 2 ProGoogleOpenAI51.0 / 50.0
Veo 3.1 Fast vs Veo 3 FastGoogleGoogle51.0 / 48.0
Veo 3.1 Fast vs Vidu Q2GoogleVidu51.0 / 45.0
Veo 3.1 Fast vs LTX-2 19BGoogleLightricks51.0 / 43.0
Veo 3.1 Fast vs Gen-4.5GoogleRunway51.0 / 40.0
Veo 3.1 Fast vs Pika v2.2 Text-to-VideoGooglePika51.0 / 26.0
Veo 3.1 Fast vs Infinity StarGoogleFoundationVision51.0 / 24.0

Methodology

How we tested Grok Imagine 1.0 and Veo 3.1 Fast

We score two things separately: how good the video looks to a reviewer, and how reliably the file itself holds up. A model can make great-looking footage and still deliver clips with freezes, bad framing, or unstable motion.

Reviewer scores
Both models receive the same prompts. Professional reviewers score how well each video follows the prompt and handles motion, composition, people, objects, animals, animation, and on-screen text. Scores use a 0-100 scale.
File reliability
Automated checks review 162 clips for freezes, bad framing, compression problems, unstable motion, distorted geometry, exposure problems, and invalid file properties.
Missing scores
Categories with a score for only one model are shown but excluded from the head-to-head win count. Price and generation speed stay separate because they use different units.
Last updated
Reviewer scores and rankings use results from July 22, 2026. Reliability results use the latest completed test for each model. Provider prices and rankings can change.
View the complete leaderboardCompare more outputs in the Arena