Qwen Image Max vs Recraft V4 on Sume: $0.09375 vs $0.05, text-only
Qwen Image Max costs $0.09375 per image on Sume and Recraft V4 $0.05, a 1.875x gap. Both only generate from text, and Recraft V4 returns WebP only.

Qwen Image Max costs $0.09375 per image on Sume and Recraft V4 costs $0.05, so Qwen is 1.875 times the price. Both rows generate from text only and do not edit images, and Recraft V4 returns WebP only. They list the same 13 aspect ratios, so the ratio you need does not separate them. Prices are as of 2026-10-09 from Sume's catalog.
If you need to edit an existing picture, neither row is the answer. Use a row that lists image editing.
Side by side
The ratio list for both is 1:1, 16:9, 9:16, 4:3, 3:4, 4:5, 5:4, 3:2, 2:3, 21:9, 9:21, 1:2 and 2:1.
| Item | Qwen Image Max | Recraft V4 |
|---|---|---|
| Price per image | $0.09375 | $0.05 |
| Image editing | no | no |
| Output format | not limited to WebP | WebP only |
| Aspect ratios listed | 13 | 13 |
| Cost of 200 images | $18.75 | $10.00 |
| Gap per image | $0.04375 more | baseline |
What the format means
WebP is smaller than PNG or JPEG for the same picture, and every current browser shows it. Some print tools, older design software and upload forms do not accept it. If your pipeline needs PNG, convert after download. That is one extra step per image, and it is free.
The Qwen row has no such limit, so a team whose downstream tools reject WebP may accept the higher price to avoid the conversion step. Count the work before you decide: for 200 images the price difference is $8.75.
Where each one fits
Recraft V4 is the lower-cost row of the two, so it is the natural first try for a set of simple graphics. Qwen Image Max costs more, so it earns its place only if its pictures are better for your subject. This page has no benchmark results and makes no quality claim for either row. The ten-prompt test below is how you find out for your own subject, using your own prompts, and it costs less than a dollar.
Because both rows list 21:9, 9:21, 2:1 and 1:2, either can make wide banners and tall strips that Seedream 5 Lite and the Imagen rows cannot. Check the ratio list in the docs for the exact values before a batch.
Batch size and jobs
Both rows accept n up to a per-model ceiling set by Sume, with 10 as the most for any row. Large batches are more likely to answer with a 202 job envelope than a direct 200, so write your client to handle both. Poll /v1/jobs/:id/status and fetch /v1/jobs/:id/result when it completes, as the jobs and results docs describe.
How to choose
Start with Recraft V4 at $0.05 for text-to-image work where WebP is fine. Move to Qwen Image Max if the images look wrong for your subject after a ten-prompt test, which costs $0.9375 on Qwen and $0.50 on Recraft. The test costs less than the first hour of arguing about it.
To edit an image, pick a row from the Image API docs that lists references. The catalog marks these two rows as text-only, so do not plan an edit workflow around them.
Sources
Related posts
More in Comparisons
- Replicate FLUX 1.1 Pro vs Sume flux-2-pro: a 250-image refresh
Replicate lists FLUX 1.1 Pro at $0.04 per image. Sume's flux-2-pro is $0.0375. For 250 images that is $10.00 against $9.375; FLUX Schnell is $0.003.
- Replicate Wan 2.1 at $0.09/s vs Sume Wan 3.0 480p: a 6-second clip
Replicate lists Wan 2.1 480p at $0.09 per output second. Sume's Wan 3.0 480p is $0.0625: $0.54 against $0.375 for 6 seconds. Different versions.
- Runway image API: Seedream 5 Lite at $0.04 vs Sume's $0.04375
Runway's API lists seedream5_lite at 4 credits ($0.04) and muse_image at 1. Sume lists Seedream 5 Lite at $0.04375 plus cheaper draft rows. 500-image totals.
- Runway lists Wan 3 and Seedance 2: 10-second price vs Sume
Runway's API sells wan3 at 10 credits a second at 720p and seedance2 at 36. Here is the 10-second price at each resolution next to Sume's list rows.
Written by Sume