Wan 2.2 TI2V-5B: 5 s of 720p in under nine minutes on a consumer GPU
Wan 2.2's card says TI2V-5B makes 5 seconds of 720P video in under nine minutes on one consumer GPU. What that means for a queue, and a hosted comparison.

Wan 2.2's model card says its 5B model can generate a 5-second 720P video "in under 9 minutes on a single consumer-grade GPU". The README sets the memory floor for TI2V-5B at 24 GB (an RTX 4090 is the example). That is a ceiling on time (about 540 seconds per clip), not a typical figure, and it is one GPU doing one clip at a time.
What does 540 seconds per clip add up to?
If one card makes at most 1 clip every 9 minutes, it makes at least 6.67 clips an hour, or about 160 in 24 hours of non-stop work. Those are arithmetic from the card's ceiling; the card gives no average. Real use has loading, failed runs and idle time.
| Clips wanted | Hours on one GPU at 9 min each |
|---|---|
| 10 | 1.5 |
| 50 | 7.5 |
| 200 | 30 |
How does a hosted clip compare?
Wan 2.2 is not on Sume; wan-3.0 is, as a hosted model, and it is a different model from these weights. fal lists wan-3.0 at $0.10 per second at 720p (fal, read 2026-10-09), and Sume reserves list times 1.25, so $0.125 per second, or $0.625 for 5 seconds at 720p. Read the live price from pricing_skus first.
So 200 clips would be $125 hosted, against 30 GPU-hours plus setup. Break-even is your GPU hourly rate: $125 divided by 30 is $4.17 per hour at full use. Below that and with the card sitting busy, self-hosting is cheaper per clip; above it, or with idle time, the hosted clip is.
How would you raise the throughput?
The simplest way is a second card, which doubles the ceiling and doubles the hardware bill. Memory-saving options in the README's commands can affect speed, so test with and without them.
Also consider clip length. The card's figure is for 5 seconds; a longer clip takes longer, and I found no scaling figure. If you need many 5-second takes, plan around the nine-minute ceiling; if you need long clips, hosted models such as wan-3.0 take 2 to 30 seconds per job.
What else should be on the list?
- Quality is not compared here: different models.
- Apache 2.0 for the weights; the hosted call has its own terms.
- Queue latency: a hosted call returns a job and a
polling_url, and the video docs say generation takes 30 seconds to several minutes.
Sources
Related posts
More in Pricing
- A 20-second 1080p Wan 3.0 job holds $5.00: what returns if it fails
A 20-second Wan 3.0 job at 1080p reserves $5.00 at submit. A successful job captures it; failed jobs release or refund the reservation where applicable.
- Wan 3.0 for 29 seconds: $1.81 at 480p, $7.25 at 1080p on Sume
Wan 3.0 takes 2 to 30 seconds per job. A 29-second clip costs $1.81 at 480p, $3.63 at 720p and $7.25 at 1080p on Sume. Arithmetic and limits inside.
- Wan 3.0 720p plus Video Upscale vs native 1080p: 8, 12, 30 seconds
Wan 3.0 at 720p plus Sume Video Upscale at $0.009/s costs 53.6% of native 1080p at 12 s: $1.608 vs $3.00. The table covers 8, 12 and 30 seconds.
- Wan 3.0 price per second: 1080p costs 4x the 480p rate
Wan 3.0 is $0.05, $0.10 and $0.20 per second at 480p, 720p and 1080p on fal. Sume bills list x 1.25. Per-clip prices at 5, 15 and 30 seconds.
Written by Sume