These are the two models on our canvas that reach 30 seconds in a single pass, which makes them the only real options when a shot has to be one continuous take. The cost gap is wide: Wan 3.0 Prime is a flat 34 credits for 5 seconds and 203 for 30, while Seedance 2.5 is 157 for 5 seconds at 720p and scales from there. Wan is the default for length; Seedance earns its price on reference-heavy work.
The price comparison
Canon 8frame prices, a credit is $0.01 at pack rate:
| Clip | Wan 3.0 base (720p) | Wan 3.0 Prime | Seedance 2.5 (720p) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5s | 48 | 34 | 157 |
| 10s | 95 | 68 | proportional |
| 30s | 284 | 203 | proportional |
Wan 3.0 Prime is flat-rate: resolution is not a pricing dimension, so 1080p costs what 480p costs. That makes it unusually cheap for long high-resolution work, and it is why it is the default recommendation here.
Where Seedance 2.5 earns the difference
Heavy reference conditioning. Its strength is taking a lot of reference input and holding it. For product work where a specific object must stay exactly right across a long take, that matters more than the per-second price.
Native audio. Generated in the same pass.
Maturity on our canvas. It has been in production here longer and we have more generations behind it, which is worth something when predictability matters.
Where Wan 3.0 earns it
Price at length. 203 credits for 30 seconds is the cheapest route to a long single take that we host, by a wide margin.
The flat-rate structure. No resolution decision to get wrong. On the base model an unset resolution bills at 1080p, the most expensive tier, so Prime also removes a footgun.
Document and webpage references. Wan 3.0 accepts documents, spreadsheets and slides as conditioning input, which no other model here does. Whether that is useful depends entirely on whether your source material is a deck.
The thing neither solves
A 30-second single generation is one roll of the dice. If second 22 is wrong you pay for all thirty again. This is true on both models and it is the reason the workflow below matters more than the model choice.
Draft short and cheap, commit long once. Generate 5 seconds on Wan 3.0 base at 480p for 24 credits, confirm the motion and framing, then run the long take. Two generations, about 227 credits, against 203 for a single blind attempt with maybe even odds.
What we have not tested
A controlled same-prompt comparison of output quality at 30 seconds. We can tell you exactly what each costs, what each accepts, and what the duration and resolution behaviour is, because those come from our own registry. We have not run a scored quality benchmark between them, and we would rather say so than publish an impression as a verdict.
FAQ
Which is cheaper for a 30-second clip? Wan 3.0 Prime at 203 credits, by a wide margin.
Is a 30-second single take better than six cuts? Only when the content is one continuous shot. Most ads are not, and length in one pass is the wrong tool for a sequence. See best AI video generator for long clips.
Does Wan 3.0 generate audio? Alibaba's materials describe audio in the same pass. We have not verified that end to end on our integration, so treat it as a vendor claim.
Draft five seconds, then commit thirty. The 8frame canvas is free and unlimited, and generation is paid from $19/month.