Swipe for more top models
Compare
Seedance 2.0 vs Grok
Seedance 2.0 edges out Grok 2025 overall (Seedance 2.0 73.0 vs Grok 2025 54.0.) Seedance 2.0 is an incredible model that can produce extremely consistent scenes with incredible actor performances. It can produce complex cinematic scenes in one go. Important caveat: this model produces the most copyrighted content out of any model we've tested—if copyright compliance is important, avoid this one. The main tradeoffs are in Logical inconsistencies in details, Copyright compliance (produces the most copyrighted content of any model), where Grok 2025 tends to score better.
Seedance 2.0ByteDance | Grok 2025xai |
|---|---|
Good for
| Good for
|
Bad for
| Bad for
|
Modalities
| Capability | Seedance 2.0 | Grok 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Text input | ||
| Image input | ||
| Video input | ||
| Audio input | ||
| Image output | ||
| Audio output |
Providers
Provider
ByteDance
bytedance
ByteDance is the platform that serves Seedance 2.0 requests, pricing, and availability.
Provider
xai
xAI
xai is the platform that serves Grok 2025 requests, pricing, and availability.
Physics
How well the model simulates real-world physics: gravity, momentum, collisions, and natural movement.
Seedance 2.0 leads on physics (+17.5), with a measurable advantage over Grok 2025. The clearest separation is on Physics (+17.5). 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, Seedance 2.0 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Seedance 2.0 | Grok 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Physics | 63.4 | 45.9 |
Prompt and Logic
Measures how accurately the model follows prompts and maintains logical consistency throughout the video.
Seedance 2.0 leads on prompt and logic (+28.4), with a measurable advantage over Grok 2025. The clearest separation is on Logic Consistency (+32.6). 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, Seedance 2.0 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Seedance 2.0 | Grok 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Prompt Adherence | 78.6 | 54.5 |
| Logic Consistency | 75.9 | 43.3 |
| Scene Consistency | — | 66.9 |
Aesthetics
Visual quality including cinematography, artistic taste, and overall production value.
Seedance 2.0 leads on aesthetics (+11.1), with a measurable advantage over Grok 2025. The clearest separation is on Cinematography (+21.7). 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, Seedance 2.0 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Seedance 2.0 | Grok 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Cinematography | 74.5 | 52.7 |
| Taste | 40.0 | — |
| Quality | 0.9 | 0.5 |
Animation
Performance on animated content styles including 2D, 3D, and anime-style animation.
Seedance 2.0 leads on animation (+7.3), with a measurable advantage over Grok 2025. The clearest separation is on Anime Animation (+25.8). 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, Seedance 2.0 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Seedance 2.0 | Grok 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| 2D Animation | 70.8 | 72.5 |
| 3D Animation | 65.6 | 67.7 |
| Anime Animation | 65.3 | 39.5 |
Humans
Accuracy of human rendering including body proportions, hand details, and realistic actor performances.
Seedance 2.0 leads on humans (+30.6), with a measurable advantage over Grok 2025. The clearest separation is on Hands (+41.6). 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, Seedance 2.0 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Seedance 2.0 | Grok 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Human | 77.5 | 57.9 |
| Hands | 81.2 | 39.7 |
| Actor Performance | — | 34.7 |
Objects and Animals
Quality of rendering inanimate objects and animals with accurate shapes, textures, and movements.
Seedance 2.0 leads on objects and animals (+16.5), with a measurable advantage over Grok 2025. The clearest separation is on Animals (+21.5). 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, Seedance 2.0 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Seedance 2.0 | Grok 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Objects | 64.6 | 53.1 |
| Animals | 76.0 | 54.5 |
Text
Ability to render readable, accurate text and typography within generated videos.
Seedance 2.0 leads on text (+38.9), with a measurable advantage over Grok 2025. The clearest separation is on Text Fidelity (+38.9). 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, Seedance 2.0 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Seedance 2.0 | Grok 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Text Fidelity | 75.9 | 37.0 |
Cost and Speed
Practical factors including pricing per video and generation latency.
Grok 2025 leads on cost and speed (+2.0), with a measurable advantage over Seedance 2.0. The clearest separation is on Price / min (+6.0). 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 2025 is the safer pick here.
| Metric | Seedance 2.0 | Grok 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Price / sec | $0.150 | $0.050 |
| Price / min | $9.00 | $3.00 |
| Latency | 0ms | 0ms |