Sume video prices are provider list x 1.25: checked on Omni Flash

Sume bills video at provider list times 1.25. Dividing Omni Flash's $0.125 by 1.25 gives $0.10 per second, which matches Google's page. Full implied-list table.

5 min readSume
All posts

Yes, Sume's video prices are the provider list price multiplied by 1.25, and Gemini Omni Flash gives a public check. Google's pricing page puts Omni Flash video output at $17.50 per 1M tokens, about $0.10 per second at 720p. Sume lists gemini-omni-flash-1.1 at 720p for $0.125 per second, and $0.125 / 1.25 = $0.10. The Sume docs state the rule: at submit Sume reserves provider list x 1.25.

The check on Google's side

Google's page says Omni Flash output is $17.50 per 1M tokens, and that 720p footage is 5,792 tokens per second. The product is 5,792 x $17.50 / 1,000,000 = $0.10136 per second, which Google rounds to approximately $0.10. Sume's per-second rate sits on the rounded figure, which is why this page calls the match approximate rather than exact: $0.10136 x 1.25 would be $0.1267, not $0.125.

Google's page also says Omni Flash input, whether text, image, video or audio, costs $1.50 per 1M tokens. The Sume rate in the catalog is per output second, so input tokens do not appear as a separate line in the figures here.

Implied provider list for every Sume row

For the other models, the provider list is not on a page this run read, so the right-hand column is an implied value: Sume's rate divided by 1.25, computed from the documented rule. Treat it as derived, not as a vendor quote. Sume rates read 2026-10-09.

Sume per-second rate and implied provider list (rate / 1.25), as of 2026-10-09
ModelResolutionSume rateArithmeticImplied list
seedance-2.5480p$0.268677$0.268677 / 1.25$0.2149416
seedance-2.5720p$0.5778$0.5778 / 1.25$0.46224
seedance-2.51080p$1.42155$1.42155 / 1.25$1.13724
seedance-2480p$0.17577$0.17577 / 1.25$0.140616
seedance-2720p$0.378$0.378 / 1.25$0.3024
seedance-21080p$0.8505$0.8505 / 1.25$0.6804
wan-3.0480p$0.0625$0.0625 / 1.25$0.05
wan-3.0720p$0.125$0.125 / 1.25$0.1
wan-3.01080p$0.25$0.25 / 1.25$0.2
minimax-h3480p$0.0625$0.0625 / 1.25$0.05
minimax-h3768p$0.075$0.075 / 1.25$0.06
minimax-h3-max480p$0.0625$0.0625 / 1.25$0.05
minimax-h3-max768p$0.1$0.1 / 1.25$0.08
minimax-h3-max1080p$0.2$0.2 / 1.25$0.16
gemini-omni-flash-1.1360p$0.0375$0.0375 / 1.25$0.03
gemini-omni-flash-1.1720p$0.125$0.125 / 1.25$0.1
gemini-omni-flash-1.11080p$0.1875$0.1875 / 1.25$0.15
gemini-omni-flash-1.14K$0.375$0.375 / 1.25$0.3

Why the check is only approximate

The match is useful, but it is not a proof for every model. The Omni row is the one row where this run could read the provider's own current price on the provider's own page. For Seedance, Wan and MiniMax, the implied list in the table is arithmetic on Sume's rate, so it shows what the documented rule implies, not what the vendor publishes.

Two practical consequences follow. When you quote a vendor list price next to a Sume price, state which side carries the multiplier. And when a vendor changes its list price, the Sume rate in the catalog is what applies to your hold, so read the catalog at the time you budget, not a cached table.

What the multiplier means for budgeting

The practical point is that you budget from Sume's rate, not from a vendor page. usage.cost on a completed job is the Sume billable amount, and the hold at submit is the same list-times-1.25 figure at default options. If you compare Sume to a vendor price, divide Sume by 1.25 first or multiply the vendor price by 1.25, and say which one you did.

Sources

Related posts

More in Pricing

All Pricing posts

Written by Sume