Megaton
#1
ByteDanceSeedance 2.5
#2
AlibabaWan 3.0
#3
ByteDanceSeedance 2.0
#4
Black Forest LabsFLUX 3
#5
GoogleGemini Omni 1.1 Flash

Swipe for more top models

Legacy evaluation · V2

HappyHorse-1.0 vs Veo 3.1

By Megaton TeamJuly 25, 2026

HappyHorse-1.0 is the clear winner over Veo 3.1. It scores higher in nearly every quality category shown and costs less.

Share
Add as preferred source
HappyHorse-1.0
Veo 3.1
Our verdict

HappyHorse-1.0 is the clear winner

HappyHorse-1.0 scores higher than Veo 3.1 in nearly every quality category shown. Its biggest lead is in text rendering, and it also costs less.

Alibaba

Alibaba

HappyHorse-1.0

62.0Overall score
Rank
—
Price per minute
$6.72/min
Google

Google

Veo 3.1

56.0Overall score
Rank
#12
Price per minute
$24.00/min

Best for

Highest overall score

HappyHorse-1.0

HappyHorse-1.0 leads the overall score by 6.0 points.

The overall score does not measure file reliability.

Best for

More readable text

HappyHorse-1.0

HappyHorse-1.0 leads by 26.0 points.

Long or moving text still needs manual review.

Best for

Lower generation cost

HappyHorse-1.0

HappyHorse-1.0 runs $6.72/min, against $24/min for Veo 3.1.

Provider prices can change.

237
videos rated
0
measurements
0
ratings
July 25, 2026
last updated

Reviewer scores

Scores by category

HappyHorse-1.0 wins 11 of 12 categories head-to-head. Each bar is the reviewer score out of 100.

Biggest gapText Fidelity: HappyHorse-1.0 ahead by 26.0 points.
Closest categoryObjects: HappyHorse-1.0 ahead by 1.0 points.

Head-to-head scores

12 categories rated head-to-head

HappyHorse-1.0Veo 3.1
Physics
50.9
55.9
Prompt Adherence
71.8
67.0
Logic Consistency
62.4
47.2
Scene Consistency
52.1
50.6
Cinematography
66.8
47.3
2D Animation
57.3
46.0
3D Animation
64.4
54.0
Human
67.2
61.9
Actor Performance
62.8
40.0
Objects
62.7
61.7
Animals
69.7
68.0
Text Fidelity
65.5
39.5

Side-by-side video tests

Matched outputs, side by side

Each row uses the same evaluation input for both models. The underlying prompt and decision record are reserved for the full report.

Video test 1

Text

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

Related category score

HappyHorse-1.0 leads here by 26.0 points.

Matched Text outputs from HappyHorse-1.0 and Veo 3.1
Loading video
HappyHorse-1.0
Loading video
Veo 3.1

Video test 2

Physics

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

Related category score

Veo 3.1 leads here by 5.0 points.

Matched Physics outputs from HappyHorse-1.0 and Veo 3.1
Loading video
HappyHorse-1.0
Loading video
Veo 3.1

Video test 3

Cinematography

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

Related category score

HappyHorse-1.0 leads here by 19.4 points.

Matched Cinematography outputs from HappyHorse-1.0 and Veo 3.1
Loading video
HappyHorse-1.0
Loading video
Veo 3.1

Capabilities

Inputs and outputs

See full HappyHorse-1.0 detailsSee full Veo 3.1 details
CapabilityHappyHorse-1.0Veo 3.1
Text inputYesYes
Image inputYesYes
Video inputYesYes
Audio inputYesNo
Image outputNoNo
Audio outputYesYes

FAQ

Common questions

Is HappyHorse-1.0 better than Veo 3.1?

HappyHorse-1.0 is better overall and leads most quality categories.

Is HappyHorse-1.0 cheaper than Veo 3.1?

HappyHorse-1.0 costs less at $8.40 per minute, compared with $24 for Veo 3.1.

Does HappyHorse-1.0 generate audio?

Yes, HappyHorse-1.0 includes audio output.

Does Veo 3.1 generate audio?

Yes, Veo 3.1 includes audio output.

Which model makes longer clips, HappyHorse-1.0 or Veo 3.1?

HappyHorse-1.0 supports longer clips at 15 seconds, compared with 8 seconds for Veo 3.1.

Which model scores higher on Text Fidelity, HappyHorse-1.0 or Veo 3.1?

HappyHorse-1.0 scores higher for text rendering.

Which model scores higher on Actor Performance, HappyHorse-1.0 or Veo 3.1?

HappyHorse-1.0 scores higher for actor performance.

How are HappyHorse-1.0 and Veo 3.1 compared?

Megaton compares each model's latest published scores. The side-by-side videos use the same prompts.

Continue researching

HappyHorse-1.0

Veo 3.1

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
Kling 3 Pro vs Veo 3.1Kling AI (Kuaishou)Google76.0 / 56.0
Veo 3.1 vs Gen-4.5GoogleRunway56.0 / 61.0
Kling 3 Pro vs Gen-4.5Kling AI (Kuaishou)Runway76.0 / 61.0

Methodology

How we tested HappyHorse-1.0 and Veo 3.1

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.

We test every model with v-benchmark v2.0, our benchmark for AI video models — the same prompts, professional reviewers, and automated reliability checks behind every score here.

Reviewer scores
Scores come from each model's latest published evaluation. The side-by-side videos use the same prompts so you can compare the results directly.
File reliability
Automated checks review 0 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 25, 2026. Reliability results use the latest completed test for each model. Provider prices and rankings can change.
How v-benchmark v2.0 worksView the complete leaderboardRead model evaluation reports
Subscribe to the Megaton newsletter

Get weekly AI video rankings, evaluation updates, and industry news delivered to your inbox.