AI 视频模型筛选器
一个可交互的 AI 视频模型对比，按你这个镜头的需求来筛
这个对比工具告诉电影人，某个具体镜头该用哪个 AI 视频模型，依据的是真正要紧的东西：片段时长、分辨率、原生音频、图生视频支持和预算。打开你项目有的那些限制，符合条件的模型就升到上面，不符合的留在下面，并写清原因。
没有最好的 AI 视频生成器，只有适合某个镜头的模型。对白戏需要原生音频，这一条就砍掉了半个市场。9:16 的社交短片和 4K 的主打镜头，需求完全不同。榜单文章总要加冕一个赢家，然后一个月就过期；而一张可筛选的规格表，回答的是你手上真正的问题，一个镜头一个镜头地回答。
全部在你的浏览器里运行。没有任何数据被发送到服务器。规格和价格于 2026 年 9 月核对自服务商文档和公开 API 页面；这个市场每月都在动，动用大额预算前请先看发布说明。
每个开关都是硬性要求。任何一条不满足的模型，会带着原因掉到下面。
预算档位符合条件的模型 12 个
价格于 2026 年 9 月核对（数据集 2026-09）。
The open-source escape hatch: unlimited retries for the price of a GPU.
Free to self-host under an open license; the real cost is GPU time (roughly $0.50 to $1.00/hour for a rented 24GB+ card). Hosted API versions exist at budget rates.
Best price-to-quality ratio for character motion, with optional native audio.
fal.ai rate of $0.07/sec with audio off; enabling native audio doubles it to $0.14/sec ($0.70 per 5s clip).
Best prompt adherence and physics at the top of the market, with 4K output.
Gemini API standard tier, $0.40/sec at 1080p with audio. 4K and multi-reference inputs lock the clip to 8 seconds.
Longest coherent single takes of any closed model, up to 25 seconds.
API rate of $0.30/sec at 720p up to $0.50/sec at 1024p+. 25-second clips require the Pro app plan's storyboard mode.
Multi-shot generation inside one clip, unusual at this price point.
Volcano Engine / BytePlus API, about $0.07/sec at 1080p ($0.03/sec at 720p). Newer Seedance versions price higher.
Standout stylized and anime motion; strong value on dynamic action.
MiniMax API bills per clip: $0.49 for a 6s 1080p clip (normalized here to 5s). 10-second clips are 768p only.
Strong scene logic and dialogue audio; the app ecosystem is where it shines.
API rate of $0.10/sec at 720p. 15-second clips are an in-app limit; the API caps single generations at 12 seconds. OpenAI has announced an API sunset for late September 2026, so treat API access as transitional.
Veo quality with audio at a price you can afford to iterate on.
Gemini API fast tier, $0.12/sec at 1080p with audio. Same model family, lower fidelity, roughly a third of the standard price.
Only model shipping true HDR output, with a reasoning pass on the prompt.
Luma API, about $0.24/sec for 1080p SDR. HDR output roughly doubles the price; draft mode is far cheaper for look development.
Fast, playful iteration and effects templates aimed at social formats.
Credit-based estimate: 40 credits per 5s 1080p clip on the $28/mo, 700-credit Standard plan ($0.04/credit). 480p drafts cost about a third of that.
Cheapest way into the Runway ecosystem for previz and animatics.
Runway developer API, $0.05/sec (5 credits/sec in-app). The workhorse tier for previz volume.
Precise motion control and the most mature editing toolchain around the model.
Runway developer API, $0.12/sec (12 credits/sec in-app). Output is 720p native; upscaling is a separate pass.
完整规格表
| 模型 | 最长片段 | 最高分辨率 | 帧率 | 音频 | 图生视频 | 每 5 秒片段 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Veo 3.1 | 8s | 4K | 24 | 有 | 有 | $2.00 |
| Veo 3.1 Fast | 8s | 1080p | 24 | 有 | 有 | $0.60 |
| Sora 2 | 15s | 720p | 30 | 有 | 有 | $0.50 |
| Sora 2 Pro | 25s | 1080p | 30 | 有 | 有 | $2.50 |
| Kling 2.6 Pro | 10s | 1080p | 30 | 有 | 有 | $0.35 |
| Runway Gen-4.5 | 10s | 720p | 24 | 无 | 有 | $0.60 |
| Runway Gen-4 Turbo | 10s | 720p | 24 | 无 | 有 | $0.25 |
| Seedance 1.0 Pro | 10s | 1080p | 24 | 无 | 有 | $0.35 |
| Luma Ray 3 | 10s | 1080p | 24 | 无 | 有 | $1.20 |
| Pika 2.2 | 10s | 1080p | 24 | 无 | 有 | $1.60* |
| Hailuo 2.3 | 10s | 1080p | 24 | 无 | 有 | $0.41 |
| Wan 2.5 | 10s | 1080p | 24 | 有 | 有 | 免费（自建） |
价格为每 5 秒片段的美元单价，取自公开 API 定价。星号表示由中档订阅套餐折算出的、基于积分的估算。
工作原理
每个开关都是作用在一份手工核对过的主流模型数据集上的硬性筛选，涵盖 Veo 3.1、Sora 2、Kling 2.6、Runway Gen-4.5、Seedance、Luma Ray 3、Pika、Hailuo 和开源的 Wan。符合条件的模型按能力分（分辨率、原生音频、图生视频、片段时长）排序，同分时更便宜的排在前面。没通过筛选的模型不会被藏起来：它们会掉到下面，并把没满足的那条要求写清楚，因为知道某个模型为什么不适合这个镜头，本身就是决策的一半。
该用哪个 AI 视频模型？
从镜头出发，别从榜单出发。对白戏里，只有带音频的模型才算数：Veo 3.1、Sora 2、Kling 2.6 和开源的 Wan 能在同一次生成里做出同步的说话声，而 Runway、Luma、Pika、Seedance 和 Hailuo 输出的是无声视频，需要后期补声。在有人说话的戏上，Kling、Veo 和 Sora 之间的取舍通常由价格和单条时长决定：Kling 是经济之选，Veo 是画质之选，Sora 2 Pro 是长镜头之选。
时长和分辨率把战场划得同样清楚。闭源模型单次生成能给出的最长片段，是 Sora 2 Pro 的 25 秒；市场上大多数停在 10 秒，Veo 3.1 停在 8 秒，之后靠延长功能往下接。如果你需要原生 4K，2026 年 9 月只有 Veo 3.1 一家。任何忽略这些硬性上限的 Veo 3 对 Sora 2、Runway 对 Kling 的对比，比的都是营销页面，不是工具。
这也是可交互筛选器胜过「2026 年最佳 AI 视频生成器」榜单文章的原因：规格每个月都在变。Kling 在 2.6 里加了原生音频，Veo 在 3.1 里加了 4K，两家的价格都在一个季度内动过。这个页面背后的数据集带着可见的日期标记，价格也统一换算到 5 秒片段上，等市场再动的时候，你能一眼看出这份对比有多新，而不用去信一篇没有日期的文章。
适合谁
- 用 AI 做电影的人 把镜头表里的每个镜头配给合适的模型，而不是逼一个模型什么都干。
- 代理商和内容团队 用点名的规格和带日期的价格向客户解释模型选择，而不是拿一份榜单排名。
- 预算有限的创作者 找出仍然满足你真实条件的最便宜模型，包括自建模型那条免费路线。
AI Video Model Picker: the complete guide
It filters a dated, hand-checked dataset of the major AI video models (Veo, Sora, Kling, Runway, Seedance, Luma, Pika, Hailuo, Wan) by audio, clip length, resolution, image-to-video, vertical output, and budget tier.
For this workflow, the central problem is clear: model comparison articles go stale in weeks and crown one winner, when the right model actually changes shot by shot. Left unresolved, this creates downstream friction and slower decisions. The practical target is a shortlist of models that meet the shot's hard requirements, with the ruled-out models named and the reason stated.
Limitation to keep in mind: It compares published specs and prices, not subjective output quality on your specific prompt; a shortlist still deserves a test generation per model before a large spend.
Advanced workflow: Advanced teams run the picker once per shot category in the shot list (dialogue, action, insert, social cut) and lock a per-category model map instead of a single house model.
Step-by-Step Workflow
- Toggle only the requirements the shot truly has; every filter is a hard constraint, not a preference.
- Read the top matches' strength lines and pricing notes, not just the price column.
- Check the ruled-out list: a model that failed only on audio may still win if you do sound in post.
- Copy the comparison text into your production notes with its September 2026 date stamp attached.
Use Cases By Profile
- AI filmmaker: find the only models that can hold a 10-second dialogue take before storyboarding around it.
- Content team: pick the cheapest model that clears 9:16 vertical and 1080p for a social campaign.
- Producer: document why a model was chosen with dated specs, so the decision survives a client review.
Common Mistakes To Avoid
- Choosing one model for a whole film instead of matching models to shot types.
- Treating an undated listicle ranking as current when specs shift monthly.
- Filtering for native audio on shots that will be sound-designed in post anyway.
Professional Best Practices
- Keep a two-model pipeline: a budget model for coverage and iteration, a premium model for hero shots.
- For dialogue, shortlist audio-native models first; lip-syncing silent footage in post rarely holds up.
- Use the free self-hosted tier as leverage: knowing Wan's cost floor sharpens every paid-model decision.
Treat this tool output as a decision support layer, not a replacement for authorship. Great scripts are remembered for specific choices, emotional precision, and clarity of dramatic movement. Tools help by removing noise so your energy can go where it matters: character, conflict, escalation, and payoff. If you review outcomes after each pass and keep an explicit log of accepted changes, your workflow becomes faster and more predictable from draft to draft. That consistency is exactly what professional collaborators value: fewer surprises, clearer rationale, and a script that evolves with intent.
Extended FAQ
Which AI video model is best for dialogue scenes?
Shortlist the audio-native models first: Veo 3.1 for fidelity, Sora 2 Pro for takes up to 25 seconds, Kling 2.6 Pro for budget with its audio toggle, and Wan 2.5 if you self-host. Silent models force lip-sync work in post that rarely survives a close-up.
How do Runway and Kling compare in 2026?
Runway Gen-4.5 offers precise motion control and a mature editing toolchain at 720p native with no audio, around $0.60 per 5-second clip. Kling 2.6 Pro delivers 1080p, strong character motion, and optional native audio from $0.35. Kling usually wins on spec sheet, Runway on workflow.
Is there a free AI video generator worth using for filmmaking?
Wan 2.5 is the serious free option: open source, 1080p, 10-second clips, native audio, and image-to-video. It costs GPU time instead of per-clip fees, so it suits retry-heavy workflows and teams comfortable running their own inference.
What specs should I compare between AI video models?
Six hard specs decide most shots: max single-generation length, max resolution, frame rate, native audio, image-to-video support, and price per clip. Everything else (style, adherence, motion quality) is worth judging on a test generation, not a spec sheet.
Which AI video models support vertical 9:16 output?
As of September 2026, all major models in this dataset generate 9:16 natively, including Veo 3.1, Sora 2, Kling 2.6, and Runway Gen-4.5. The real differentiators for vertical social work are price per clip and resolution, not aspect ratio support.
What separates Veo 3.1 from Sora 2 in practice?
Veo 3.1 leads on image fidelity, physics, and native 4K, at 8-second generations. Sora 2 leans on longer coherent takes (15 seconds, 25 on Pro) and its app ecosystem. For a single hero shot Veo usually wins; for extended continuous action, Sora 2 Pro does.
常见问题
截至 2026 年 9 月：谷歌 Veo 3.1（两个档位）、OpenAI Sora 2 和 Sora 2 Pro、Kling 2.6 Pro（作为一个大致会让价格翻倍的开关），以及开源的 Wan 2.5。Runway Gen-4.5、Luma Ray 3、Pika、Seedance 和 Hailuo 生成的是无声视频。
Sora 2 Pro 领先，通过它的分镜模式能做到 25 秒的单条。Sora 2 在应用内能到 15 秒，其他大多数模型（Kling、Runway、Seedance、Luma、Pika、Hailuo、Wan）上限是 10 秒，Veo 3.1 是 8 秒，不过它的延长功能能把一个镜头接到两分钟以上。
它们解决的是不同的问题。Kling 2.6 Pro 在每 5 秒片段大约 0.35 到 0.70 美元的价位上，给出很扎实的人物运动，适合需要大量重试的流程。Veo 3.1 标准档每 5 秒片段约 2.00 美元，但在提示词遵循度、物理表现和 4K 上领先。很多电影人用 Kling 打草稿，主打镜头再拿 Veo 重拍。
因为落选的原因本身就是信息。看到 Runway Gen-4.5 是因为原生音频、而不是因为画质被刷掉，你就知道只要后期处理声音，它依然是个选项。把不符合的模型藏起来，会把一次规格层面的决策变成一个黑箱。
每一项规格和价格都在 2026 年 9 月对照服务商文档和公开 API 定价核对过，数据集上也明确带着那个日期。AI 视频的规格每月都在变，这正是这里放的是一份带日期、可筛选的数据集，而不是一篇静态排行文章的原因。
