Is Wan 3.0 an upgrade on Wan 2.7? 113 Elo more on the AA editing board
On the AA video-editing board Wan 3.0 (1,187, $12.00 a minute) beats Wan 2.7 (1,074, $16.90) by 113 Elo. Sume lists Wan 3.0, not 2.7; it runs 2 to 30 s.
On Artificial Analysis's video-editing board, Wan 3.0 scores 1,187 and Wan 2.7 scores 1,074, a gap of 113 Elo, and Wan 3.0's listed price is lower: $12.00 per minute against $16.90. On the usual Elo scale a 113-point gap is a 65.6% win chance for the higher model. Sume's video docs list wan-3.0, not Wan 2.7, so on Sume the choice does not arise: you get 3.0.
The two entries side by side
Both rows are from the editing board. Wan 3.0 is also first on text-to-video.
| Item | Wan 3.0 | Wan 2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Rank | 1 | 7 |
| Elo | 1187 | 1074 |
| Listed price per minute | $12.00 | $16.90 |
| Price difference | -$4.90 (29% lower) | n/a |
What the vendor says about 3.0
Alibaba's model page lists Wan 3.0 video with text, image, video and audio input, text-to-video, image-to-video from a first or first and last frame, and reference modes, at 480P, 720P and 1080P, with clips up to 30 seconds. The $0.05, $0.10 and $0.20 per second Singapore list is $3.00 for a 30 second clip at 720P. The page does not give a Wan 2.7 comparison, so the board is the only head-to-head here.
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| Sume id | wan-3.0 |
| Duration | 2 to 30 seconds |
| Resolutions | 480p, 720p, 1080p |
| Sume per second | $0.0625, $0.125, $0.25 |
| 30 s at 720p | 30 x $0.125 = $3.75 |
The edit route is the catch
The board result is for editing, and Sume's documented edit route is Gemini Omni Flash 1.1, not Wan. So Wan 3.0's first place on the editing board does not mean Sume can edit with Wan. What Sume offers from the same family is generation: text, first and last frame and reference images, videos and audio, up to the limits in its API.
If your reason to upgrade is generation quality, the text-to-video board has Wan 3.0 first at 1,156. If your reason is editing an existing clip, use the Omni route, which is third on the editing board at 1,139. The Omni editing post has the price per source second.
What the upgrade costs you
On Sume there is nothing to upgrade, since only wan-3.0 is listed. If you call Wan 2.7 elsewhere and are weighing a move, compare the two on your own clips at the same length. The board lists $16.90 for Wan 2.7 against $12.00 for Wan 3.0 per minute, so a 5 minute edit job at those prices is $84.50 against $60.00.
Do not treat the board price as your bill. It is the listed vendor price for the board's test settings, and your resolution, region and length will decide the real cost.
What changed in the release
The limits that matter for the move are in Alibaba's model page and Sume's docs: Wan 3.0 runs up to 30 seconds, and Sume accepts 2 to 30.
If you have prompts that worked on Wan 2.7, keep them as a regression set. Run the same ten prompts on wan-3.0 at 480p, where ten 5 second clips cost 10 x $0.3125 = $3.125, and compare.
Sources
Related posts
More in Comparisons
- JSON2Video credits per second and 4K at 4x vs Sume Timeline
JSON2Video deducts one credit per video second and four times that for 4K. Sume Timeline charges $0.10 per rounded output minute. What a minute costs on each.
- Kapwing Business $50 or $64 vs 250 to 320 Sume caption jobs
Kapwing Business lists $64 monthly or $50 billed annually with 4,000 AI credits. At $0.20 per Sume caption job, that money buys 320 or 250 clips of 60 seconds.
- Kapwing Pro 120-minute export vs Sume Timeline 30-minute cap
Kapwing Pro lists 120-minute exports at $24 a month. Sume Timeline accepts 1 to 1,800 seconds per render at $0.10 per output minute. Which fits a long edit?
- Kling 3.0 Omni is 9th for video editing at 1,000 Elo: Kling 3 on Sume
Kling 3.0 Omni (1080p Pro) is ninth on the AA video-editing board at $10.91 a minute. Sume lists kling-3 for generation: $8.40 or $12.60 a minute, 4 to 15 s.
Written by Sume