GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst vs Seedream 5 Pro for Image Generation
Seedream 5 Pro is the stronger pick in this run for prompt adherence, typography, anatomy, advertising composition, structured graphics, and garment integration. GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst has the edge for scene relighting, cross-ratio outpainting, and a complex object-binding edit, while counting and product-preservation scenarios split evenly.
Side-by-side facts
| Feature | GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst | Seedream 5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | OpenAI | ByteDance |
| Availability on Banana Pie | Available now | Available now |
| Credits from | 30 credits | 25 credits |
| Max resolution | 4K | 2K |
| Reference images | Up to 8 | Up to 8 |
Scenario by scenario
Same prompt. Two models. Judge the difference in the published images below.
Product material and lighting
Better here: Seedream 5 ProRIGHT follows the requested half-fill level and subtle, physically plausible reflection more closely, while LEFT has stronger upper-left lighting but overfills the bottle and produces a more pronounced reflection.
- Exactly one bottle and no extras: Tie. Both images show one upright transparent rectangular perfume bottle on bare wet stone, with no visible text, logo, plants, or separate objects.
- Half-filled amber liquid: Right does better. Its amber liquid occupies approximately the lower half of the bottle body, while the left bottle appears filled noticeably above halfway.
- Coherent refraction and reflection: Right does better. Its restrained reflection falls directly beneath the bottle and the glass edges distort the background consistently; the left has a much brighter, sprawling reflection and some visually complex distortions around the thick glass base.
- Upper-left lighting and contact shadow: Left does better. It has a clearly directional upper-left highlight, bright left-facing glass edges, and a corresponding shadow extending to the right; the right lighting is softer and more frontal, making the requested direction and contact shadow less distinct.
Prompt & settings used
Prompt
A premium product photograph of exactly one transparent rectangular perfume bottle, half filled with amber liquid, standing upright on wet black stone. Light comes from the upper left, creating coherent refraction, a contact shadow, and one subtle reflection. No text, logo, plants, or extra objects.
Multilingual typography
Better here: Seedream 5 ProRight follows the requested four-line poster structure exactly, while Left incorrectly wraps the first line.
- Exactly four centered text lines and no additional text: Right does better. It shows exactly four centered lines, while Left splits “MOONLIGHT MARKET” across two lines, producing five visible text lines.
- Exact wording and order: Right does better. Its four lines read “MOONLIGHT MARKET”, “月光市集”, “18 OCT”, and “RIVER HALL” in the requested order. Left renders the same wording and order but breaks “MOONLIGHT MARKET” into separate “MOONLIGHT” and “MARKET” lines.
- Specified colors: Tie. Both render “月光市集” in red and all English and numeric text in black.
- Legibility, spacing, and alignment: Right does better overall. Both are legible and centered, but Right keeps each requested item on one line in a more compact, coherent arrangement; Left’s oversized first item wraps and disrupts the four-line structure.
Prompt & settings used
Prompt
Design a clean cream-colored vertical event poster. Show exactly four centered text lines and no other text: "MOONLIGHT MARKET", "月光市集", "18 OCT", and "RIVER HALL". Render "月光市集" in red and all other lines in black.
Human anatomy and contact
Better here: Seedream 5 ProThe right image is stronger overall because its finger count, anatomy, and hand-to-clay interaction are clearer and more plausible.
- Exactly two fully visible hands are present, with no extra hands or people: Tie. Each image visibly contains one potter and exactly two hands, with no additional hands or people; in both, small portions of fingers are naturally occluded by the bowl during contact.
- Each hand has exactly five distinct, naturally formed fingers: Right does better. On the right, five digits can be distinguished on each hand, including the thumbs. On the left, the clay-covered fingers overlap heavily and the thumbs are difficult to distinguish, making the exact count less visually certain.
- The fingers, joints, and contact with the clay are anatomically plausible: Right does better. Its inner hand presses into the bowl while the other supports the exterior, with convincing bends and joint placement. The left fingers look unusually long, crowded, and nearly parallel, and both hands press into the bowl in a less natural shaping pose.
- The clay bowl, spinning wheel, and shaping action are clearly recognizable: Right does better. The bowl and wheel are clear in both, but the right image more clearly shows the standard coordinated action of shaping the inside with one hand while supporting the outside with the other.
Prompt & settings used
Prompt
A photorealistic close-up of an adult potter shaping a clay bowl on a spinning wheel. Both hands are fully visible, each with five natural fingers touching the clay. No other people or hands. Soft window light.
Counting and attribute binding
Depends on the taskBoth images satisfy all four criteria with the requested counts, attributes, arrangement, and handle direction. The visible differences are stylistic rather than rubric-relevant.
- Object count and placement: tie; both images visibly show exactly three red cubes in a row on the left, two blue spheres on the right, and one yellow mug centered behind the foreground objects.
- Color, shape, and material binding: tie; both depict red cubes with visible wood-like surface texture, blue transparent glass-like spheres, and a glossy yellow ceramic mug.
- Mug handle direction: tie; the mug handle is clearly attached on and extends toward the right in both images.
- No additional objects or text: tie; neither image contains any visible extra objects or text.
Prompt & settings used
Prompt
On a matte gray table, exactly three red wooden cubes form a row on the left, exactly two blue glass spheres sit on the right, and one yellow ceramic mug stands centered behind them. The mug handle points right. No other objects or text.
Advertising composition
Better here: Seedream 5 ProRight follows the text restriction exactly while preserving the requested composition. Left has a stronger lower-right shoe placement, but the additional visible "AERO" text is a direct prompt violation.
- Exactly one silver shoe and orange trail: Left does better. It clearly places one silver shoe in the lower-right, while an orange trail enters from the bottom-left and curves into the scene. Right also shows exactly one silver shoe and a bottom-left orange trail, though its shoe sits closer to center-right.
- Visible text: Right does better. Its only visible text is "RUN LIGHT" and "42 KM", both spelled correctly. Left renders "RUN LIGHT" and "42 KM" correctly but also visibly includes "AERO" on the shoe, violating the no-other-text requirement.
- Top spacing and headline placement: Tie. Both leave roughly the top portion visibly uncluttered and position "RUN LIGHT" in the upper-left directly beneath that empty area.
- Visibility and hierarchy: Tie. Both keep the headline, badge, trail, and single shoe fully visible, with a clear hierarchy led by the headline and shoe.
Prompt & settings used
Prompt
Create a vertical social ad for a fictional running shoe named AERO. Keep the top 15 percent empty. Directly below it, place the headline "RUN LIGHT" in the upper-left. Show exactly one silver shoe in the lower-right, an orange trail curving from the bottom-left, and a round badge reading "42 KM". No other shoes or text.
Structured UI graphic
Better here: Seedream 5 ProRIGHT follows the requested structure precisely, while LEFT adds unrequested plan values and therefore fails the explicit no-additional-text constraint.
- Criterion 1: Tie. Both render the exact title "CHOOSE YOUR PLAN" and exactly three columns labeled "STARTER", "PRO", and "TEAM".
- Criterion 2: Right does better. Both show exactly three aligned rows labeled "PROJECTS", "STORAGE", and "SUPPORT", but the right presents only those requested row labels, while the left adds values beside them.
- Criterion 3: Tie. Each column on both sides contains exactly one blue button labeled "SELECT".
- Criterion 4: Right does better. Its three columns are evenly aligned and contain no additional text. The left adds "3", "5 GB", "Email", "10", "50 GB", "Priority", "Unlimited", "1 TB", and "24/7", violating the no-additional-text requirement.
Prompt & settings used
Prompt
Create a clean horizontal pricing comparison graphic titled "CHOOSE YOUR PLAN". Use exactly three equal columns labeled "STARTER", "PRO", and "TEAM". Under each column, show exactly three aligned rows labeled "PROJECTS", "STORAGE", and "SUPPORT", followed by one blue button labeled "SELECT". White background, dark navy text, no additional columns or text.
Six-reference object binding and edit
Better here: GPT Image 2.5 SunburstLEFT has a narrow advantage because it cleanly adds two distinct lemons without the apparent orange-to-lemon leaf crossover visible in RIGHT. The remaining requested replacements are comparably present in both outputs.
- Criterion 1: Tie. Both images visibly show a dark navy-blue mug and a folded green-and-white striped napkin in comparable tabletop positions, with no red mug or white towel remaining. Exact reference matching cannot be confirmed because the source references are not shown.
- Criterion 2: Tie. Both images contain exactly one orange and one mustard-yellow hardcover notebook, and neither visibly retains a green pear or blue notebook. Exact reference appearance and original placement cannot be verified without the references.
- Criterion 3: Left does better. Both show exactly two lemons to the right of the mug, but RIGHT gives one lemon a prominent green leaf similar to the orange's leaf, suggesting visible cross-binding between fruit assets; LEFT keeps both lemons distinct and unadorned.
- Criterion 4: Tie. Both preserve a coherent wooden tabletop scene with similar overhead framing, wood grain, lighting, and shadows. Whether either remains exactly unchanged from Reference 1 cannot be assessed because Reference 1 is not visible.
Reference images
Prompt & settings used
Prompt
Use Reference 1 as the base tabletop scene. Replace the red mug with the exact dark navy-blue mug from Reference 2 in the same position and orientation. Replace the folded white towel with the exact green-and-white striped napkin from Reference 3 in the same folded area. Replace the green pear with exactly one orange from Reference 4 in the same position. Replace the blue notebook with the exact mustard-yellow hardcover notebook from Reference 5 in the same position. Add exactly the two lemons from Reference 6 to the right of the mug. Preserve the wooden table, camera, framing, wood grain, lighting, shadows, and all other spatial relationships from Reference 1. Do not copy the white product backgrounds from References 2–6, duplicate any asset, or add other objects.
In-image text replacement
Better here: Seedream 5 ProRight wins narrowly because both outputs render the requested text correctly, while its spacing looks more internally consistent. Exact preservation of the source remains uncertain because the original image is not shown.
- Exact text and removal: Tie. Both signs visibly read exactly "NIGHT OWL", and no old text is visible.
- Additional or malformed characters: Tie. Both images show only the letters in "NIGHT OWL", with no extra, duplicated, or malformed characters.
- Font, spacing, and perspective: Right does better. Both use similar uppercase sans-serif lettering aligned with the sign, but the right image has more natural and consistent letter spacing; the left renders "NIGHT" unusually spread out. Exact preservation cannot be confirmed without the original image.
- Material, lighting, and scene preservation: Tie. Both signs retain visible dark-green wood texture and coherent sunlight and shadow across the storefront. Whether either surrounding scene is completely unchanged cannot be assessed without the original image.
Reference images
Prompt & settings used
Prompt
Replace only the sign text with exactly "NIGHT OWL". Preserve the original font style, spacing, perspective, sign material, lighting, and everything else.
Multi-reference identity and garment transfer
Better here: Seedream 5 ProRight has the edge for the more natural garment fit and integration, but the missing reference images prevent a reliable judgment of the two most important transfer requirements.
- Identity and composition preservation: Cannot be assessed reliably because Reference 1 is not shown; the exact facial identity, expression, hair, pose, body proportions, and framing cannot be compared with the source portrait.
- Jacket fidelity: Cannot be assessed reliably because Reference 2 is not shown; both outputs visibly depict a light-blue denim jacket with a cream shearling collar, metal buttons, chest pockets, and a red sleeve patch, but exact correspondence to the source garment is unknown.
- Replacement and source isolation: Tie. Both visibly replace the upper-body suit garment with a denim jacket, and neither includes a ghost mannequin or white product background.
- Physical coherence: Right does better. Its open jacket hangs naturally around the white shirt, the hands overlap cleanly in front, and the sleeve folds and scene lighting are coherent. Left is also plausible, but the closed front bunches more awkwardly around the hands and lower buttons.
Reference images
Prompt & settings used
Prompt
Use the portrait in Reference 1 for the person and the isolated jacket in Reference 2 for the garment. Dress the person from Reference 1 in the exact jacket shown in Reference 2. Preserve the person's identity, face, expression, skin, hair, hands, pose, body proportions, background, framing, and lighting from Reference 1. Preserve the jacket's material, color, collar, buttons, pockets, and sleeve patch from Reference 2. Do not copy the ghost mannequin or white product background.
Coherent scene relighting
Better here: GPT Image 2.5 SunburstLeft creates the clearer and more spatially convincing golden-hour relighting, with stronger localized highlights and coherent projected shadows. Object preservation cannot be verified from the outputs alone.
- Warm golden-hour light clearly enters from the left window: Left does better; the visible low sun and intense warm light through the left window create a clearer golden-hour source, while Right is warm but less explicitly sunlit at the window.
- Highlights and shadow directions respond coherently to the new light source: Left does better; bright window-shaped patches, foliage shadows on the wall, strong highlights on the sofa and floor, and long table shadows all extend consistently away from the left window. Right is also coherent, but its floor and table shadows are subtler.
- The result is more than a uniform yellow color filter: Left does better; it preserves strong variation between direct golden sunlight, neutral shaded upholstery, dark furniture undersides, and crisp projected shadows. Right also shows localized illumination rather than merely uniform tinting, but the effect is less pronounced.
- No furniture or decor is moved, added, removed, or redesigned: This cannot be reliably assessed without the original image; both outputs visibly contain the same basic set of objects, including a sofa, coffee table, rug, potted tree, floor lamp, and left-side window.
Reference images
Prompt & settings used
Prompt
Change the lighting to warm golden-hour sunlight entering from the left window. Do not move, add, remove, or redesign any object. Update highlights and shadows coherently.
Cross-ratio outpainting
Better here: GPT Image 2.5 SunburstLEFT better satisfies the directly visible format requirement by producing a 16:9 landscape, while both sides appear comparably seamless. Exact source preservation cannot be judged from the outputs alone.
- Final output format and side content: LEFT does better. LEFT is visibly a 16:9 landscape with beach, ocean, and sky continuing naturally across both sides; RIGHT is visibly narrower than 16:9, though it also contains plausible side extensions.
- Original image preservation and centering: Both cabins are centered and neither image shows obvious stretching or letterboxing, but the complete original source image is not shown separately, so cropping and exact preservation cannot be reliably assessed.
- Cabin, shoreline, and internal composition: This cannot be reliably assessed without the original source image. The cabin and shoreline differ visibly between LEFT and RIGHT, but that alone does not establish which output changed the source.
- Extension integrity: Tie. Neither image has an obvious boundary seam, mirrored filler, or conspicuously repeated object; the sand, waves, horizon, and clouds transition plausibly across both frames.
Reference images
Prompt & settings used
Prompt
Expand the canvas to a 16:9 landscape by naturally continuing the beach, ocean, and sky on both sides. Keep the complete original image centered without cropping, stretching, letterboxing, or modifying it.
Product preservation across scene change
Depends on the taskThe left establishes the requested court scene and lighting more convincingly, while the right preserves the sneaker itself more cleanly. Each wins two criteria, with no clear overall edge.
- Wet outdoor basketball court at dusk: left does better. Both show a wet court under a dusk sky, but the left includes a clearly visible basketball hoop, backboard, court markings, and floodlights, making the requested setting unmistakable.
- Sneaker consistency: right does better. The right sneaker has cleaner, more uniform material surfaces, stitching, panel boundaries, sole geometry, and silhouette; the left introduces dense water droplets across the shoe that obscure some material and stitching details.
- Black geometric side mark: right does better. Both marks are readable as the same branching angular shape, but the right mark has cleaner, sharper edges and more consistent proportions, while the left mark appears slightly less regular around the central junction.
- Physically coherent contact, reflection, and dusk lighting: left does better. Its contact shadow sits consistently beneath the sole and the warm sunset reflections align with the visible low sun. The right has a stronger shoe reflection, but that reflection is distorted and unusually dark, especially beneath the forefoot.
Reference images
Prompt & settings used
Prompt
Place the sneaker on a wet outdoor basketball court at dusk. Preserve the exact sneaker shape, black geometric side mark, materials, stitching, sole geometry, and camera angle. Add physically coherent contact, reflections, and dusk lighting.
Cost & latency
GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst starts at 30 credits, while Seedream 5 Pro starts at 25 credits, giving Seedream the lower entry cost. In this run's small latency sample, GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst ranged from about 69 s to 155 s per scenario and Seedream 5 Pro from about 39 s to 141 s; these observations reflect this run, not general benchmark speeds.
How we compared & disclosure
We used one fixed prompt per scenario and ran each prompt once with each model, then published the outputs as generated. This is a reproducible fixed-prompt comparison, and both models are sold on Banana Pie.
Banana Pie sells paid access to this model alongside other models in one studio. Our verdicts come from tests run through the same pipeline our users get.