GPT-4o vs Flux & Extra

In at this time’s world, AI picture era purposes are quickly exploding and reworking the best way we create issues. At the moment, with text-to-image generator instruments, some purposes can create lifelike and particular pictures from easy textual content prompts. The appliance of that is monumental, so even selecting the perfect AI picture generator is dependent upon one’s wants. On this article, we’ll be exploring 5 flagship AI picture era mannequin, and every of those AI picture turbines will probably be going by means of a unique sequence of duties to uncover their strengths and limitations. So, whether or not you’re a developer, artist, or inventive designer, discovering the perfect picture generator with the optimum stability of high quality, pace, and API value is vital for reworking creativity into outcomes. 

Why Selecting the Proper AI Picture Technology Mannequin Issues?

Despite the fact that the picture era subject is quickly evolving and we are able to discover some new fashions and updates day by day. However not all picture turbines are created equal. Every mannequin has its strengths, weaknesses, and preferrred use instances. Some concentrate on uncooked photo-realism, others on pace or inventive model. In observe, when evaluating the software, the selection of mannequin is usually primarily based on parameters comparable to value or ecosystem. As a lot as uncooked high quality.

For instance, if you’re producing extremely stylized fantasy paintings, then one software may provide advantages. In case you are producing a crisp technical diagram, then one other may be higher suited. Realizing which AI suits your challenge will prevent numerous time in trial and error and exponentially enhance your productiveness.

Overview of the Textual content-to-Picture AI Fashions In contrast

On this article, we have now in contrast our duties on 4 of the main AI fashions. These are:

A multimodal mannequin (one of many newest within the GPT-4 sequence) that builds pictures from textual content and pictures as nicely. It brings collectively highly effective purposes of language with picture era.

GPT-4o (OpenAI)

A multimodal mannequin (one of many newest within the GPT-4 sequence) that builds pictures from textual content and pictures as nicely. It brings collectively highly effective purposes of language with picture era.

API Pricing: $10.00/1M enter tokens & $40.00/1M output tokens.

Additionally Learn: 10 Picture Technology Prompts to Attempt Out on GPT-4o

Flux (Leonardo.AI)

Flux is a set of picture fashions (like Flux Schnell, Flux Dev, Flux Professional) which are quick and versatile. It can create pictures at wrap pace with Flux Schnell, and with extraordinarily detailed additionally with Flux Dev/Professional.

API Pricing: Comes with 4 plans:

• Primary: $9/month with 3500 api credit
• Normal: $49/month with 25000 api credit
• Professional: $299/month with 200,000 credit
• Customized: Customized API credit quantity

Additionally Learn: Run the Flux Mannequin on 8GB GPU RAM

Phoenix 1.0 (Leonardo.AI)

Phoenix 1.0 is Leonardo’s new base mannequin for prime visible expertise. Together with the superior picture era, the mannequin additionally gives superior image-guidance capabilities like devoted immediate following and inventive management.

API Pricing: Comes with 4 plans:

• Primary: $9/month with 3500 api credit
• Normal: $49/month with 25000 api credit
• Professional: $299/month with 200,000 credit
• Customized: Customized API credit quantity

Adobe Firefly

Adobe’s AI picture generator is designed for inventive professionals with built-in Photoshop and Artistic Cloud assist, and has quite a few totally different artwork types. It could possibly create almost something from lifelike images to fantasy-style illustrations with a easy interface.

API Pricing: Comes with three plans:

• Normal: $9.99/month with 2,000 generative credit.
• Professional: $29.99/month with 7,000 generative credit.
• Premium: $199.99/month with 50,000 generative credit.

Additionally Learn: Use Adobe Firefly Picture 3

Imagen 4-Extremely 

Imagen 4 is the newest addition to Gemini picture era fashions. It excels in offering nice particulars and giving a practical contact to the picture. It additionally powers its picture capabilities in Google merchandise like Slides and Gemini Advance, making it preferrred for duties with excessive accuracy.

API Pricing:  Out there in Gemini API Tier 1, 2, and three Plans with a price of  $0.06/picture

So, every software is totally different and has some strengths and weaknesses. Within the subsequent sections, we’ll look into their capabilities and output on metrics, after which evaluate the outputs of every of those for the precise job.

Analysis Metrics

On this part, to make sure equity, we’ll test the outcomes of the fashions, i.e, generated pictures, together with the next metrics parameters.

1. Customization Choices: Does the mannequin permit customization additional as soon as the picture has been generated by giving additional modifications within the immediate?
2. API Entry & Pricing: Does the mannequin have the api assist in order that the builders can combine it inside their challenge workflow? If “Sure”, then what’s the api pricing per million tokens?
3. Formatting Capabilities: Does the api additionally assist multi-panel layouts and embedded textual content?
4. Side Ratio Assist: Can we choose or set the picture side ratio and dimensions that we wish to generate?
5. Platform Compatibility: Does the mannequin provide compatibility throughout totally different platforms comparable to internet, cell, and desktop? Or is it integrable with the cross-platform purposes?

Activity-based Comparability of AI Picture Technology Fashions

On this part, we’ll evaluate the efficiency of particular person mannequin on the identical immediate, and test their generated pictures. So, let’s start with the comparability of those fashions on the duties talked about beneath:

• Graphic Portrait Composition
• Product Mockup
• Technical Infographic
• Epic Medieval Portrait

Activity 1: Graphic Portrait Composition

Activity Description: We instructed all the instruments to create a stylized portrait combining a practical face with graphic components (like textual content labels or icons). 

Immediate: “Create an ultra-realistic 8K portrait of a assured younger man (face as uploaded) in high-contrast black and white, carrying {a partially} seen black leather-based jacket. His voluminous hair provides texture, and one eye is obscured by a daring crimson rectangle, encased in a crimson geometric body. Set in opposition to a textured gray background, the left aspect options repeated daring textual content “PAUL SOMENDRA” with clear layering, interspersed with a crimson Nike emblem, stylized “S,” and a vertical crimson line. On the backside proper, the phrase “WORK SMART NOT HARD” seems in daring crimson caps, with “SMART” and “GRAPHICS” in elegant cursive. A crimson #PAUL sits within the backside left. The lighting is delicate but dramatic, highlighting textures, with vivid crimson accents creating a strong fusion of streetwear and graphic artwork. Shallow depth of subject, DSLR-level element, 4:5 side ratio.”

Output:

Activity Evaluation

• GPT-4o: Created a really detailed, pure portrait. Facial options have been crisp and lifelike. The software program appropriately positioned any textual content or graphic overlays, ie, names or labels, have been crisp and legible. The general composition was utterly skilled and unified.
• Flux: Generated a colourful portrait with sort of vibrant colours. The model was a bit extra inventive (with enhanced saturation). Flux organized the graphic components properly, though the smaller textual content within the picture was slightly blurrier than GPT-4o’s.
• Phoenix 1.0: Introduced a really polished picture. The attractive lighting and textures, together with the shiny and detailed clothes within the portrait, have been really outstanding. 
• Imagen 4-Extremely: Imagen good and colourful portrait, fairly just like Flux. However the textual content is neither completely positioned nor written appropriately.
• Adobe Firefly: The portrait was okay, however lower than the goal. The face was properly rendered, however the added graphics, like labels, have been lacking, and the textual content was additionally distorted. 

Verdict: GPT-4o wins with its mix of realism and precision. Flux is a powerful second (quick and colourful), Phoenix third, then comes Imagen 4-Extremely, and Firefly final.

Activity 2: Product Mockup

Activity Description: Every mannequin was tasked with rendering a high-end product in a practical method, on a easy studio background.

Immediate: “Generate a premium product mockup of a pair of wi-fi earbuds named ‘NovaPods Professional’. The earbuds ought to be positioned inside an open matte black charging case with glossy, rounded edges. Add metallic silver accents alongside the edges of each earbuds for a futuristic contact. The model title “NovaPods Professional” ought to be printed in a refined silver font on the middle of the charging case lid.

Place the product on a darkish picket desk or easy black floor, with minimal background distractions. Add refined lighting flares, low-key shadows, and delicate reflection beneath the case to offer a cinematic, high-tech ambiance. The lighting ought to come from a top-left diagonal angle, casting a delicate spotlight on the earbuds’ metallic edges. The product ought to seem as whether it is a part of a tech commercial for a luxurious electronics model.

Keep a shallow depth of subject with the product in sharp focus and the background barely blurred. Guarantee high-resolution photorealism, correct proportions, clear strains, and a refined, editorial look.”

Output:

Activity Evaluation

• GPT-4o: Delivered a really lifelike mockup. The product appeared like actual earbuds positioned on a desk with a metallic case, and the composition appeared expertly finished. Lastly, it was comparatively realistic-looking than Flux.
• Flux: Offered a great mockup, however it was barely quieter. The product appeared correct; nonetheless, its reflections & nice highlights have been barely much less sharp. Flux had the added benefit of its pace to find iterations of angles and lighting.
• Imagen 4-Extremely: Imagen 4 created a pleasant product mockup. However the product appeared to have a number of reflections. If we maintain that apart, then it will likely be second.
• Phoenix 1.0: Created a really spectacular picture with numerous publicity because of their lighting. Phoenix was very near Flux’s realism, however the textual content “NovaPods Professional” is distorted, that’s the reason it’s beneath Flux.
• Adobe Firefly: The mockup was nice, however didn’t have as a lot element, and was not as refined. Additionally, the textual content written over the earbuds is closely distorted.

Verdict: GPT-4o was finest at photorealism; Flux comes second, then Imagen was closest to Flux however maybe slightly extra stylized; then the Phoenix 1.0 resulting from it’s distorted textual content, and lastly, we have now Adobe Firefly.

Activity 3: Technical Infographic

Activity Description: We requested every software to create a flowchart or infographic course of for “Agentic AI”, with a number of steps labeled with arrows. Textual content label legibility was tremendous vital.

Immediate: “Create an in depth course of movement infographic that visually illustrates how an Agentic AI system capabilities, specializing in readability, clear design, and technical accuracy. The infographic ought to consist of 4 key phases, organized both horizontally or vertically in a left-to-right or top-down structure to point out development. The phases are:

Activity Decomposition by a Planner Agent – visually represented with a guidelines icon or flowchart image to depict how a high-level job is damaged into smaller subtasks.

Activity Task to Specialised Brokers – represented by branching arrows resulting in 2–3 agent icons with labels like “Information Fetcher,” “Content material Generator,” or “Evaluator,” every with a novel colour or icon (e.g., processor, ebook, magnifier).

Inter-agent Communication – present brokers exchanging messages through chat bubble icons or connection strains, highlighting dynamic collaboration between roles.

Remaining Output Aggregation – represented by a doc or report icon the place all outcomes are merged and refined into the ultimate response.

Use arrows to point out the logical movement between every stage, and color-code the brokers or blocks to visually separate roles (e.g., blue for planner, inexperienced for employee brokers, purple for communication). Select a lightweight, tech-style background with clear strains, rounded shapes, and delicate shadows. Keep brief, readable labels or annotations (3–5 phrases max) for every step – preferrred for embedding in technical blogs or displays. The general visible ought to convey modular intelligence.”

Output:

Activity Evaluation

• Imagen 4-Extremely: Clearly the perfect out of those 5. It created a easy and interactive workflow. Makes it simple to know the workflow.
• GPT-4o: It produced a pointy flowchart format with clear phases. It spell-checked the labels, and all have been legible. The orientation made sense and used arrows and packing containers in a manner that visibly follows a logical movement. It created the diagram with the readability of a seasoned diagrammer.
• Flux: Had numerous issues with the duty. It produced a picture that had some packing containers and arrows, however the textual content in them was nearly completely non-words. It both left blanks or produced random letters.
• Phoenix 1.0: Just like Flux. It generated a colorfully embellished chart, however the precise phrases within the labels have been largely nonreadable. It had a phrase or two generated appropriately, and solely slightly textual content was coherent.
• Adobe Firefly: Firefly failed utterly. Firefly’s picture was busy, however there have been no labels that have been ornamental or textual content that was significant. The model made the content material tough to learn.

Verdict: General, Imagen 4-Extremely  ended up victorious due to its potential to generate and iterate textual content. GPT-4o comes out second as a result of it’s uniquely in a position to analyze and perceive text-based pictures or infographics, amongst others, whereas the opposite three, Flux, Phoenix, and Abode, failed in doing so.

Activity 4: Epic Medieval Portrait

Activity Description: The immediate was for an ultra-realistic portrait of a medieval warrior, as if it have been a high-budget film poster.

Immediate: “Create a hyper-realistic, 8K portrait (4:5 side ratio) of a younger medieval warrior with the identical face because the uploaded picture. He has rugged, swept-back hair, a brief, well-groomed beard, and a peaceful but fearless, decided expression. Delicate facial scars – one throughout the cheek, one other close to the forehead – improve his hardened warrior look.

He wears worn blackened metal armor (pauldron) over a chainmail tunic, partially draped in a deep crimson cloak. The armor bears scratches and engraved particulars, exhibiting battle expertise and the Aristocracy. A leather-based strap and buckle cross his chest, with a sword hilt or axe deal with subtly seen behind his shoulder.

The background is a misty medieval battlefield or foggy mountain move, rendered in moody greys and earth tones, with faint ruins or banners within the distance. Use delicate, cinematic lighting to spotlight armor, hair, and facial texture, with a rim mild for separation. Focus sharply on the face with a shallow depth of subject, captured in DSLR Hasselblad X2D 100C high quality. Emphasize photorealism, sharp element, and a dramatic, noble ambiance. ”

Output:

Activity Evaluation

• GPT-4o: Delivered the perfect general end result. The facial options of the warrior had film-quality lifelike element, and the armor had acceptable texture.
• Adobe Firefly: Firefly’s warrior had a really pure colour. The pores and skin and armor appeared very lifelike by way of colour and texture. General had a heroic vibe.
• Flux: The warrior picture produced had a powerful picture general, however a bit extra stylized by way of colour palette, with a painted high quality to the armor. The face had considerably of a “painted” high quality to it, however nonetheless very prime quality for a quick generate.
• Phoenix 1.0 & Imagen 4-Extremely: They least detailed right here, and the end result evoked extra of an idea, of a well-composed and atmospheric situation. All of the textures appeared a bit too delicate. It had a cool stylized palette of colours, however merely lacked the pin-sharp element out there in GPT-4o.

Verdict: As soon as once more, GPT-4o wins by a mile by way of pure realism. Flux and Firefly got here in a valiant second place. Imagen and Phoenix tied for third, each had a strong efficiency.

General Comparability

On this part, we’ll see the general comparability primarily based on the 4 duties and their api assist and pricing for every mannequin:

Conclusion

In our evaluations, GPT-4o stands out as undoubtedly probably the most versatile and succesful mannequin. Its particular potential to mix language and picture that means gives it with a novel benefit in accuracy. That being stated, the “finest” software is relative to your use case. Flux and Phoenix are finest for idea work, shortly and polished inventive rendering, respectively. Firefly can spark concepts, whereas the opposite fashions can help the inventive design course of in varied methods.

Nobody mannequin is all the time the perfect for every part. The progress in AI picture era has improved in a short time. As of 2025, every of those finest fashions can produce placing, usable artwork, however what makes these fashions totally different additionally differentiates your best option for a selected job. Finally, the perfect recommendation is to easily take into consideration what your priorities are, as a result of the perfect software is the one that matches your wants to your particular challenge.

Incessantly Requested Questions