Wan 3.0 vs Wan 2.7 Video

What each one accepts

Rates and clip costs

Charged from a prepaid USD balance, no taxes added. A failed generation is $0.

Wan 3.0 is the more recent Alibaba release: 2 to 30 seconds, 480P up to 4K, sound by default and a much bigger reference set. Wan 2.7 Video stays in the catalogue for one job Wan 3.0 does not do in Kadraris: editing or extending a video you already have. For anything new I go with Wan 3.0, since at 720P it is even a touch cheaper, and its 480P tier comes in under half of Wan 2.7's price.

When to pick Wan 3.0

• One shot of 15 to 30 s with no stitching.
• 2-second test clips at 480P before you commit to a final resolution.
• 2K or 4K for an ad or for cropping later.
• Heavy reference work, like one character drawn from several photos, movement borrowed from a clip and a voice taken from a recording.

When to pick Wan 2.7 Video

• Reworking a section of footage you already have, guided by a prompt.
• Lengthening a clip that stops too early.
• Making a still image move to an audio track (image_url plus audio_url).
• Excluding something specific through negative_prompt.

Differences you will notice

• Price. Wan 3.0 costs from $0.0777 per second and Wan 2.7 Video from $0.161 per second, both at 1080P. The newer model is roughly 3% cheaper at 720P and roughly 1.17x the older one at 1080P. Wan 3.0 at 2K is about 1.7x and at 4K almost 2x Wan 2.7 at 1080P. A 5 s clip in Wan 3.0 at 480P costs under half the Wan 2.7 720P clip.
• Length. Wan 3.0: 2-30 s, or a model-chosen length with duration: -1 (billed as 30 s). Wan 2.7: 2-15 s, or 2-10 s when editing or using a reference video.
• Resolution and sound. Wan 3.0 has five tiers and renders sound unless told not to (generate_audio, free). Wan 2.7 offers 720P and 1080P only, with no sound switch; in its case a file in audio_url animates a still picture to the rhythm of the audio.
• Editing. Reworking (video_url) and extending (video_urls) existing footage is possible only in Wan 2.7.
• References and prompt. Start and end frames work in both. Wan 3.0 also takes 10 images, 5 clips and 5 sound files at most; Wan 2.7 takes up to 4 images here. Prompts: 20,000 characters in 3.0, 5,000 in 2.7. Both have 16:9, 9:16, 1:1, 4:3 and 3:4, and only 3.0 adds adaptive.

How to decide

• Making something new: Wan 3.0.
• Working on footage you already have, or needing a negative prompt: Wan 2.7 Video.

Input video seconds are billed in both, so for batches in Wan 3.0 set the length yourself rather than using duration: -1. Wan 3.0 earned 7.75/10 across my two tests, run through another API: convincing reflections on wet cobblestones, 2 wrong words in a 12-word Polish line, and music I had not requested. I have not tested Wan 2.7. See also my 2026 video generator roundup and Wan 3.0 vs Kling 3.0. Price any mix in the AI cost calculator.

Questions

Can I get a sound track out of Wan 2.7?

Not from the form, there is no audio switch. If you want sound baked in, use Wan 3.0, where it is free.

Is 1080P cheaper in the older model?

Yes, Wan 2.7 is about 15% cheaper at 1080P. At 720P the newer model costs slightly less.

Can Wan 3.0 animate a photo to my voiceover?

It accepts audio as a reference, but the dedicated photo-plus-audio mode (image_url with audio_url) is in Wan 2.7.

Samples from the makers

These clips and images come from the vendors, not from my runs.