Ideogram 4.5 costs the same at any size; GPT Image 2.5 does not
Ideogram 4.5 lists $0.03, $0.06 or $0.22 per image whatever the size; GPT Image 2.5 output rises with pixels. Which to pick for 1K versus 2K and 4K work.
Ideogram 4.5 is priced by quality tier only: Fal lists $0.03 for low, $0.06 for medium and $0.22 for high, and says the image size does not change the price. GPT Image 2.5 is priced by output tokens, which grow with pixels and with quality. On the list numbers below, GPT Image 2.5 output stays cheaper than Ideogram at every matching tier name, even at 4K, before input tokens and Sume pricing.
Where the lines cross
Fal's GPT Image 2.5 Flare page gives the token rate, and Sume's Image API docs give the size rules and the Ideogram prices. The table uses output tokens only for GPT, so add input tokens and Sume pricing on top.
On Sume, Ideogram 4.5 takes resolution: 1K|2K, GPT Image 2.5 takes presets or custom pixels. Compare at pixels you would really ship.
| Quality tier | Ideogram 4.5 (any size) | GPT 2.5 at 1024x1024 | GPT 2.5 at 2560x1440 | GPT 2.5 at 3840x2160 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| low | $0.03 | $0.00588 | $0.00615 | $0.01113 |
| medium | $0.06 | $0.01317 | $0.01434 | $0.02595 |
| high | $0.22 | $0.05268 | $0.05529 | $0.10008 |
What the table says
On these list numbers GPT Image 2.5 output is cheaper than Ideogram 4.5 at every matching tier name, even at 4K, though OpenAI's guide calls resolutions above 2560x1440 experimental. That does not make GPT the better buy for every job: Ideogram's own pitch on its Fal page is accurate text rendering for posters and logos, and the tier names are not the same quality across vendors. medium on one is not medium on the other.
The flat price helps in a different case: you want the largest size Ideogram offers and you want to avoid a surprise from the token formula. The cost then depends only on the tier you pick.
How to decide
- Text-heavy poster or logo: render the same prompt on both at
mediumand compare legibility before comparing cost. - Large print or a hero crop: GPT Image 2.5 lets you set explicit pixels; check the limits (multiples of 16, 3840 edge, 3:1).
- Many cheap drafts: GPT Image 2.5
lowis the lowest list figure here. - Anything with references: see the limits, 16 for GPT versus 5 for Ideogram 4.5.
Test with one call each
Read usage.cost from the response, which is the USD billed to your wallet, and compare it with this table. Sume applies its own pricing, and the endpoint pricing lines are what you pay. Send both calls with n: 1 and the same prompt:
for model in openai/gpt-image-2.5 ideogram/ideogram-v4.5; do
curl -s -X POST "https://api.sume.com/v1/images" \
-H "Authorization: Bearer $SUME_API_KEY" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d "{\"model\": \"$model\", \"prompt\": \"A poster that says OPEN LATE in bold letters\", \"quality\": \"medium\", \"n\": 1}"
echo
doneSources
Related posts
More in Pricing
- Ideogram 4.5 high costs 7x low: when it pays
Ideogram 4.5 lists at $0.03, $0.06 or $0.22 per image by quality, whatever the size. High is about 7x low; here is a plan for when the extra cost is worth it.
- Is the Veo 3.1 API free? The per-second prices Google lists
Veo 3.1 on the Gemini API is priced per second for Standard, Fast and Lite, charged only on success. The rates, plus 8-second clip totals and what to verify.
- Kling 3 with sound costs 50% more: $0.14 vs $0.21 a second on Sume
On Sume, kling-3 is $0.14 a second with generate_audio false and $0.21 with it on. What that adds up to for 5, 10 and 15 second clips.
- Kling credit plans vs a USD balance for video on Sume
Kling sells credit plans from Free to Ultra. Sume has no Kling text-to-video id in its docs and bills each video job in USD from a workspace balance.
Written by Sume