69 Prompts both models were run on. Each slide shows the two clips for one Prompt, with the Prompt and the human preference split underneath.
Summary and how to choose
Duration: not confirmed for Luma Ray 2, versus 4s / 6s / 8s (8s required for extension, reference images, 1080p and 4K) for Google Veo 3.1. Resolution: not confirmed for Luma Ray 2, versus 720p (default) · 1080p (8s only) · 4K (8s only, not on Lite) · 24fps for Google Veo 3.1. Controls: not confirmed for Luma Ray 2, versus T2V · I2V · Ingredients (up to 3 reference images, not on Lite) · First–last frame · Scene extension (~148s max, not on Lite) for Google Veo 3.1. Audio: not confirmed for Luma Ray 2, versus Included in video pricing for Google Veo 3.1.
Luma Ray 2
Strengths: a checked plan, credit or no-rate path.
Trade-offs: the full output envelope is not confirmed, generation modes are not confirmed, audio support is not confirmed, and pricing is not normalized to a per-second rate.
Google Veo 3.1
Strengths: a documented output envelope (4s / 6s / 8s (8s required for extension, reference images, 1080p and 4K) · 720p (default) · 1080p (8s only) · 4K (8s only, not on Lite) · 24fps), documented generation controls (T2V · I2V · Ingredients (up to 3 reference images, not on Lite) · First–last frame · Scene extension (~148s max, not on Lite)), documented audio support (Included in video pricing), published exact per-second API rates, and a checked plan, credit or no-rate path.
Choose Luma Ray 2 when a checked plan, credit or no-rate path matter most. Choose Google Veo 3.1 when transparent exact API pricing, documented generation controls, documented audio output, a checked plan, credit or no-rate path, and its documented duration and resolution envelope matter most.
For output quality, use the paired vote split below; it is specific to the shared Prompts shown here. This summary compares confirmed documentation and pricing only; it does not infer visual quality or rank models.
Overall · 69 shared Prompts
no ties
- Luma Ray 2
- 41%
- preferred on 21/69
- Google Veo 3.1
- 59%
- preferred on 48/69
Average share of weighted human votes across every shared Prompt, published by Rapidata. This is the dataset’s vote split, not a rating by this site.
Prompt 1 of 69
Human preference on this pairing
Share of weighted human votes for these two clips, collected by Rapidata. It compares this exact pair of clips — it is not an absolute score and not our rating.
Prompt
A 'day in the life' of a cutting-edge urban dance crew rehearsing for a global competition. Showcase their intense training, creative choreography sessions, high-tech stage setups, team dynamics, and the adrenaline-filled moments of their electrifying performance under the city lights.
All 69 Prompts in this matchup
List-price signal
Checked 2026-09-19
Exact and estimate rows are USD per output second. Rows marked Exact are published provider rates; rows marked Estimate are official examples calculated from token consumption, not fixed per-second plan prices. Plan, credit and token paths are grouped separately. A dash means no comparable checked price.
| Basis | Luma Ray 2 | Google Veo 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| USD / output second | ||
| Lite · 720pexact | No comparable checked price | $0.05 |
| Lite · 1080pexact | No comparable checked price | $0.08 |
| Fast · 720pexact | No comparable checked price | $0.10 |
| Fast · 1080pexact | No comparable checked price | $0.12 |
| Fast · 4Kexact | No comparable checked price | $0.30 |
| Standard · 720p / 1080pexact | No comparable checked price | $0.40 |
| Standard · 4Kexact | No comparable checked price | $0.60 |
| Other checked billing paths | ||
| Ray 2 | Not listed | No comparable checked price |
| Plans | $30 / $90 / $300 per month | No comparable checked price |
| Included credits | 10,000 / 40,000 / 150,000 | No comparable checked price |
| Current credit tables | Ray3.2 · Ray3.14 · partner models | No comparable checked price |
| Lite · 4K | No comparable checked price | Not offered |
| Luma Ray 2: Plan credits are platform-wide; no Ray 2-specific per-second credit cost was listed. | ||
| Google Veo 3.1: Audio included. Re-verified 2026-09-28 against Google's pricing page: rates unchanged; billed only when a video actually generates. | ||
This is a price signal, not a quality ranking. Resolution, capabilities, input materials, failed generations, taxes, and regional account terms are not normalized.
- Luma official pricing page · checked 2026-09-19
- Google Gemini API pricing · checked 2026-09-28
Where these clips come from
Both clips and the preference split are published by Rapidata under APACHE-2.0, retrieved 2026-09-11. Media is served directly from their Hugging Face repositories; this site re-hosts nothing and adds no rating of its own.
- Rapidata/text-2-video-human-preferences
- Rapidata/text-2-video-human-preferences-veo3.1
- Rapidata/text-2-video-human-preferences-veo3
- Rapidata/text-2-video-human-preferences-veo2
- Rapidata/text-2-video-human-preferences-seedance-1-pro
- Rapidata/text-2-video-human-preferences-kling-v2.1-master
- Rapidata/text-2-video-human-preferences-wan2.1
- Rapidata/text-2-video-human-preferences-pika2.2
- Rapidata/text-2-video-human-preferences-moonvalley-marey
- Rapidata/text-2-video-human-preferences-genmo-mochi-1
Where to run these models
This site does not generate video and does not sell generation credits, so it has no reason to prefer either model. To run them, use the provider’s own API or app.
Frequently asked questions
Did these two models run the same Prompts?
Yes. Luma Ray 2 and Google Veo 3.1 were both run on the same 69 Prompts, with identical Prompt text sent to each model. Each slide on this page shows the two clips generated for one Prompt.
Which model did people prefer overall?
Across 69 Prompts, Luma Ray 2 averaged 41% of the weighted human preference for each pair, and Google Veo 3.1 averaged 59%. These are vote shares published by Rapidata; they are not a rating by this site.
How many Prompts was each model preferred on?
Luma Ray 2 was preferred on 21 of 69 Prompts and Google Veo 3.1 on 48, with no ties.
Can I generate these videos on this site?
No. This site does not generate video and does not sell generation credits; it compares models and links out to each provider. Running these models means using the provider's own API or app.