Comparison最后更新：2026-07-29
Seedance 2 vs Veo 3.1
Compare Seedance 2 and Google Veo 3.1: credits, resolution, duration, audio, and best use cases for 2026.
Seedance 2 — 最适合：
- +Social media content calendars
- +Ultrawide / cinematic social formats
- +Multi-reference short videos
- +Teams needing audio + flexible length
Veo 3.1 — 最适合：
- +Professional commercial shoots
- +Cinematic B-roll and establishing shots
- +4K quality requirements
- +Text-in-video scenes
- +Brand-consistent content series
| Feature | NewSeedance 2 ByteDance | HotVeo 3.1 Google |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | ByteDance | |
| Price | 4 credits/video | 5 credits/video |
| Duration | 4–15s variable | 8s fixed |
| Resolution | 480p–1080p | 720p–4K |
| Aspect Ratios | 16:9, 9:16, 1:1, 4:3, 21:9, adaptive | 16:9, 9:16, 1:1, 4:3, 21:9 |
| Native Audio | Yes | No |
| 首帧参考 | Yes | Yes |
| 尾帧参考 | Yes | No |
| Base64 Support | Yes | No |
| Negative Prompt | No | No |
| Prompt Enhancement | No | No |
| Camera Control | No | No |
Seedance 2 的不足之处
- -No 4K output
- -Less proven for text-in-video than Veo
- -Portrait-first workflows may prefer Kling
- -Newer model with fewer third-party writeups
Veo 3.1 的不足之处
- -Fixed 8-second clip duration
- -No native audio generation
- -No negative prompt control
- -No camera movement controls
- -Higher cost per generation
准备好开始创作了吗？
在 videobao 上同时体验两款模型——一份订阅，全部模型。