Seedance 2.0 vs Kling 3.0

Both Seedance 2.0 and Kling 3.0 are available on Scenes AI, and the choice between them is quality against cost. Seedance 2.0 rates higher on measured image-to-video quality, while Kling 3.0 is cheaper per second of finished video. Every figure below comes from the same catalogue that bills your account.

Side by side

Specifications and rates, straight from the live catalogue.

Seedance 2.0 compared with Kling 3.0
SpecSeedance 2.0Kling 3.0
Made byByteDanceKuaishou
Quality score100/100—
BillingPer second of outputPer second of output
From (per second)$0.12$0.091
Longest scene15s15s
Aspect ratios7 (1:1, 4:3, 3:4, 16:9, 9:16, 21:9, adaptive)3 (16:9, 9:16, 1:1)
Resolutions480p, 720p, 1080p, 4k720p, 1080p, 4k
Reference images912
Scene-to-scene morphYesYes
In-video audioOptionalOptional

Which should you pick?

Use Kling 3.0 while you are still working out whether the idea holds — the whole point of a cheap engine is that a draft you throw away costs very little. Switch to Seedance 2.0 for the version you intend to publish. Because Scenes AI shows you a scrubbable preview before any clips are bought, you can settle the structure cheaply and only pay the higher rate once.

Price your own video with either engine on the pricing page, or read the full specs for Seedance 2.0 and Kling 3.0.

Related

FAQ

Common questions

Can't find what you're looking for? Visit help and support or email hello@usescenes.com and a human will reply.

Seedance 2.0 scores higher on measured image-to-video quality (100 out of 100), and Kling 3.0 is cheaper to run. If the two are different engines, that is the whole trade-off: pick Kling 3.0 while you are still iterating on an idea, and Seedance 2.0 for the version you intend to publish.