Use Wan 3.0 for almost everything you were using Wan 2.5 for. It goes to 30 seconds instead of 15, it accepts documents and web pages as references alongside text and images, and on the 8frame canvas its Prime tier costs 34 credits for a 5-second clip against Wan 2.5's 102 at the same 1080p. Wan 2.5 stays worth knowing about for one reason only: it is the version most tooling and most tutorials still assume, so if you are following an existing pipeline built around it, the migration is yours to schedule rather than urgent.
TL;DR
- Price at 1080p, 5 seconds: Wan 3.0 Prime 34 credits, Wan 2.5 102. Base Wan 3.0 at 480p is 24
- Duration: Wan 3.0 runs 2 to 30 seconds in one pass; Wan 2.5 is 5, 10, or 15
- Inputs: Wan 3.0 adds document and webpage references (decks, spreadsheets, PDFs) on top of text and image
- Neither is open weights. The last downloadable Wan is 2.2 under Apache 2.0
- Reason to stay on 2.5: an existing pipeline, and nothing else
The price table
Canon 8frame credit prices, a credit is $0.01 in a top-up pack:
| Clip | Wan 2.5 | Wan 3.0 base | Wan 3.0 Prime |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5s at 480p | not offered | 24 | 34 |
| 5s at 720p | not offered | 48 | 34 |
| 5s at 1080p | 102 | 95 | 34 |
| 10s at 1080p | 203 | 189 | 68 |
| 15s | 304 | 284 (at 1080p) | 101 |
| 30s | not offered | 567 (at 1080p) | 203 |
The Prime column is the story. Wan 2.5 pinned output at 1080p and charged for it; Prime charges a flat rate where resolution is not a pricing dimension at all. Full mechanics in Wan 3.0 pricing explained.
What actually changed
Duration, and it is the real upgrade. Fifteen seconds to thirty is not an incremental bump, it is the difference between a clip you cut into something and a clip that can be the whole thing. A 30-second ad in one generation has no joins to hide.
Reference inputs. Wan 3.0 accepts documents, spreadsheets, slides, PDFs and web pages as conditioning alongside text and images. Every other major model in 2026 takes text, images, and sometimes video. Turning a deck into video is a different input class, and it is the most genuinely novel thing in this release.
Where the model runs. Wan 2.5 is a single hosted endpoint. Wan 3.0 arrived as two variants on two providers with different billing shapes, which is why the price comparison is not one number.
What did not change: the license. Both are API-only. Alibaba published weights for 2.1 and 2.2 and stopped, and Wan 3.0 continued that. If you came looking for a self-hostable upgrade, there is not one; see is Wan 3.0 open source for the receipts.
What we have not tested
Output quality. We have priced both into the canvas and can tell you exactly what each costs and what each accepts, and we have not yet run a controlled same-prompt comparison of Wan 3.0 against Wan 2.5. When we do, this article gets the numbers rather than an impression. Treat any page claiming a decisive quality verdict two days after the pricing landed with suspicion, including ours if it ever does that.
What we can say from the specification: 1080p on both, and Wan 3.0's longer range means a 30-second generation holds one continuous take, which is a coherence advantage no amount of stitching gives 2.5.
When to use which
Wan 3.0 Prime: the default. Cheapest route to 1080p in the family, longest range, flat pricing that cannot surprise you.
Wan 3.0 base at 480p: volume drafting at 24 credits a clip, the cheapest moving picture on the canvas.
Wan 2.5: an existing workflow you are not ready to touch, or a tutorial you are following literally. There is no output-quality argument we can currently make for it, and the price argument runs the other way.
Wan 2.2: when you need to self-host, which no newer Wan supports.
The migration, if you have a pipeline on 2.5
Three things change. Duration options widen from three fixed tiers to any integer from 2 to 30, so anything hardcoding 5 / 10 / 15 needs to widen. Resolution becomes a real choice on the base model, and an unset value bills at 1080p, the most expensive tier, so set it explicitly. And the model identifier differs by variant, since Prime and base run on different providers.
On the canvas none of that is your problem, it is a picker change. If you are calling providers directly, it is a small day of work.
FAQ
Is Wan 3.0 better than Wan 2.5? It is longer, cheaper, and accepts more input types. On raw output quality we have not run the comparison, and we would rather say so than guess.
Should I switch immediately? If you generate on the canvas, yes, there is no cost to switching. If you have infrastructure built around 2.5, schedule it rather than rushing; 2.5 is not being retired that we know of.
Does Wan 3.0 generate audio? Alibaba's beta materials describe audio produced in the same pass. We have not verified that end to end on our integration, so treat it as a vendor claim for now.
Run both from the same picker and see the bill before you commit. The 8frame canvas is free and unlimited, and generation is paid from $19/month.