seedream 4.5 vs Seedream 5 Pro for Image Generation
Seedream 5 Pro won most of these fixed-prompt scenarios, with stronger prompt adherence, anatomy, composition, object binding, editing, and relighting. Choose seedream 4.5 for the tested product-preservation scene or when the lower observed latency in this run matters; counting, structured UI graphics, and outpainting ended in ties.
Side-by-side facts
| Feature | seedream 4.5 | Seedream 5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | ByteDance | ByteDance |
| Availability on Banana Pie | Available now | Available now |
| Credits from | 25 credits | 25 credits |
| Max resolution | 4K | 2K |
| Reference images | Up to 8 | Up to 8 |
Scenario by scenario
Both models ran the identical prompt under our fixed suite - the images are the published runs, shown exactly as generated.
Product material and lighting
Better here: Seedream 5 ProRight follows the requested fill level and physical product-lighting behavior substantially better.
- Exactly one transparent rectangular perfume bottle is visible, with no text, logo, or extra objects: Right does better because it shows one complete, clearly recognizable rectangular perfume bottle with no visible text, logo, or additional objects; left also shows one bottle but crops its top edge.
- The bottle is visibly filled halfway with amber liquid: Right clearly does better because its amber liquid reaches approximately the midpoint of the bottle body, while the left bottle appears nearly full.
- The glass refraction and the reflection on the wet black stone are physically coherent: Right does better because the glass edges, liquid distortion, and centered reflection align plausibly; left has a disproportionately long, diffuse amber reflection and less convincing optical boundaries inside the bottle.
- Upper-left lighting produces consistent highlights and a plausible contact shadow: Right does better because the brighter left-facing glass edges, restrained highlights, and grounded shadow around the base are consistent; left has upper-left illumination but severe blown highlights and a large hard-edged shadow that makes the lighting less coherent.
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 multilingual poster layout exactly, while Left turns two requested lines into four separate lines.
- Exactly four centered text lines and no additional text: Right does better. It shows exactly four centered lines. Left breaks "MOONLIGHT MARKET" and "18 OCT" across separate lines, resulting in six visible text lines.
- Exact text and order: Right does better. Its lines read exactly "MOONLIGHT MARKET", "月光市集", "18 OCT", and "RIVER HALL" in the requested order. Left contains those words and characters in order, but "MOONLIGHT MARKET" and "18 OCT" are each split across two lines.
- Specified text colors: Tie. Both render "月光市集" in red and all Latin text in black.
- Legibility, spacing, and alignment: Right does better. Its four lines are clearly legible, centered, and arranged with consistent spacing. Left is centered and legible, but the oversized type causes unintended wrapping and much less even vertical spacing.
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 ProRight is the stronger result overall because it presents clearer hand separation, more plausible anatomy and contact, and a more recognizable pottery-shaping action, despite not visibly confirming all five fingers on the hand inside the bowl.
- Exactly two fully visible hands are present, with no extra hands or people: Right does better. Both show exactly two hands and no extra person, but the hands are more clearly separated and readable on the right; the rear hand on the left is substantially obscured by the foreground hand.
- Each hand has exactly five distinct, naturally formed fingers: Left does better narrowly. Its foreground hand clearly shows four fingers and a thumb, while the other hand is partly obscured; on the right, the hand inside the bowl does not show a distinct thumb, so five fingers cannot be confirmed for that hand.
- The fingers, joints, and contact with the clay are anatomically plausible: Right does better. Its knuckles, finger lengths, and opposing inside-and-outside grip look natural, while the left hand overlap makes several fingers visually ambiguous and the shaping contact less convincing.
- The clay bowl, spinning wheel, and shaping action are clearly recognizable: Right does better. The bowl sits clearly on a wheel with one hand inside and one supporting the exterior, making the shaping action immediately legible; the left also shows a bowl and wheel, but the overlapping hands obscure the action.
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, handle direction, and absence of extras. The differences are compositional rather than rubric-relevant.
- Object count and placement: tie. Both images visibly show exactly three red cubes in a row on the left, exactly two blue spheres on the right, and one yellow mug centered behind the foreground objects.
- Color, shape, and material binding: tie. Both images clearly depict red wooden cubes with visible grain, translucent blue glass spheres, and a glossy yellow ceramic mug.
- Mug handle direction: tie. The handle is clearly visible on the right side of the mug 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 ProThe right image follows the requested layout more closely, especially the empty top area, upper-left headline placement, and overall visual hierarchy.
- Exactly one silver shoe and orange trail: Both show exactly one silver shoe in the lower-right and an orange trail extending from the bottom-left; the right has a cleaner, more clearly curving trail, while the left trail is broader and partly runs beneath the shoe, so the right does slightly better.
- Only visible text: Both limit visible text to "RUN LIGHT" and "42 KM", with both phrases spelled correctly. This criterion is a tie.
- Top spacing and headline placement: The right does better because its top area is visibly empty and "RUN LIGHT" sits directly below it in the upper-left. On the left, "RUN LIGHT" is extremely large and extends into the upper portion, while an orange band also occupies the top edge.
- Visibility and visual hierarchy: The right does better because the headline, badge, shoe, and trail are all fully visible with clear separation and balanced emphasis. The left keeps the elements visible, but the oversized "RUN LIGHT" dominates much of the composition and weakens the hierarchy.
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
Depends on the taskBoth images satisfy all four rubric criteria. Their styling differs, but neither has a visible compliance advantage.
- Title and columns: Tie. Both render the exact title "CHOOSE YOUR PLAN" and exactly three columns labeled "STARTER", "PRO", and "TEAM".
- Rows: Tie. Every column in both images contains exactly the three required rows, rendered as "PROJECTS", "STORAGE", and "SUPPORT", with consistent alignment.
- Buttons: Tie. Every column in both images contains exactly one blue button labeled "SELECT".
- Alignment and additional content: Tie. Both show three evenly arranged columns without any additional columns or text; LEFT uses a centered table grid, while RIGHT uses evenly spaced left-aligned content with vertical separators.
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: Seedream 5 ProRight better preserves the apparent base-scene framing and spatial presentation; both otherwise satisfy the visible object-count and replacement requirements equally well.
- Criterion 1: Tie. Both visibly replace the source items with a dark navy mug with a gold-colored rim and a folded green-and-white striped napkin; without the reference images, exact appearance and base-position preservation cannot be verified.
- Criterion 2: Tie. Both show exactly one orange and one mustard-yellow hardcover notebook, with no visible green pear or blue notebook remaining; exact reference matching cannot be assessed without References 4 and 5.
- Criterion 3: Tie. Both show exactly two lemons to the right of the mug, with no visible extra fruit or duplicated objects.
- Criterion 4: Right does better. It shows a wider, more coherent tabletop framing with all objects fully visible and more surrounding wood grain, while the left is much more tightly cropped and enlarges the mug, lemons, and notebook substantially. Exact preservation from Reference 1 cannot be confirmed because that reference is not shown.
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 ProBoth outputs render the requested text correctly and cleanly. The right output has a slight edge because its wider framing appears less altered, though the missing source image makes the preservation criteria uncertain.
- Exact text and old-text removal: Tie. Both signs visibly read exactly "NIGHT OWL", with no remaining old text visible.
- No additional or malformed characters: Tie. Both signs contain only the clearly formed characters in "NIGHT OWL".
- Font character, spacing, and perspective preservation: Tie. Both use clean uppercase sans-serif lettering aligned to the sign's perspective, but preservation of the original font and spacing cannot be verified without the source image.
- Sign material, lighting, and surrounding-scene preservation: Right. Both show a dark green wood-grain sign under matching directional light, but the right image retains a wider storefront composition while the left is visibly reframed and cropped more tightly; exact preservation against the source cannot otherwise be confirmed.
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 is the stronger result overall, mainly because it preserves a fuller pose and framing and integrates the open jacket more naturally. The missing source references prevent a confident judgment of exact identity and garment matching.
- Identity and composition preservation: Right does better visibly because it retains more of the person's torso, arms, and original-looking hand pose, while Left uses a much tighter crop that changes the framing. Exact facial identity and expression preservation cannot be confirmed without Reference 1.
- Jacket fidelity: Right does better in visible garment completeness: the light-blue denim, cream shearling collar, metal buttons, two flap pockets, and red sleeve patch are all clearly represented, with the open front showing the jacket's construction. Exact agreement with Reference 2 cannot be confirmed because that reference is not shown.
- Full replacement and reference contamination: Tie. Both outputs completely replace the black suit jacket with the denim jacket, and neither visibly includes a ghost mannequin or white product background.
- Physical coherence: Right does better. Its open jacket hangs naturally around the white shirt, the sleeves meet the wrists cleanly, and the hands and jacket overlap coherently. Left is broadly plausible, but the closed jacket looks unusually rigid and oversized around the torso, and the tightly overlapping fingers are less cleanly resolved.
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: Seedream 5 ProRIGHT provides the more convincing relighting: its warm illumination is directional, spatially coherent, and balanced by neutral shaded areas rather than overwhelming the whole room with orange.
- Warm golden-hour light clearly enters from the left window: right does better; warm sunlight visibly projects from the left-side window across the sofa and wall, while left is much more uniformly orange throughout the room.
- Highlights and shadow directions respond coherently to the new light source: right does better; the window-frame projections, plant shadow, sofa shading, and lamp shadow consistently extend away from the left window. Left has directional shadows too, but its broad, intensely bright wall patches look less naturally integrated.
- The result is more than a uniform yellow color filter: right does better; it retains neutral whites and cooler shaded areas while applying warmth selectively to sunlit surfaces. Left has distinct light and shadow, but the strong orange cast affects nearly the entire scene.
- No furniture or decor is moved, added, removed, or redesigned: this cannot be assessed without the original source image; the two outputs have substantially different framing and apparent object proportions, but neither reveals which one preserved the source.
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
Depends on the taskBoth images satisfy the visibly assessable outpainting requirements to a similar degree. Source-image preservation cannot be determined without the original, so there is no defensible overall winner.
- 16:9 output with natural new content on both sides: Tie. Both outputs are landscape and naturally continue the blue sky, ocean, shoreline, and sand across both sides.
- Complete original image centered without cropping or stretching: Tie. Both show the entire cabin centered with ample surrounding beach and sky, and neither has visible geometric stretching or edge cropping. Exact preservation of the unseen source cannot be verified from these outputs alone.
- Original cabin, shoreline, and internal composition unchanged: This cannot be reliably assessed because the original image is not shown. The cabin and shoreline differ in scale and vertical placement between the two outputs, but the images alone do not establish which one matches the source.
- No visible seams, mirrored filler, or repeated objects: Tie. Neither image shows an obvious extension boundary, mirrored pattern, or duplicated object; the water, clouds, and beach textures continue cleanly across each frame.
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
Better here: seedream 4.5Left has the stronger overall result because the sneaker construction and wet-surface integration are more coherent, although Right communicates the outdoor basketball-court setting more clearly. Exact product preservation cannot be confirmed without the source image.
- Convincing court placement: Right does better; the chain-link fence, illuminated court lamps, painted lines, puddles, and purple dusk sky make the outdoor basketball-court setting more immediately legible. Left also shows a wet court at sunset, but fewer basketball-specific surroundings are visible.
- Sneaker consistency: Left does better on visible construction quality; its silhouette, layered sole, stitching, laces, and material transitions look cleaner and more internally consistent. Right has small irregular protrusions and speckling along the lower sole. Exact preservation against the original camera angle and sneaker cannot be fully assessed because the source image is not shown.
- Black geometric side mark: Both display a clear, readable black angular mark with the same general bent-line structure. Whether either remains exactly unchanged from the source cannot be assessed without the original image.
- Physical coherence: Left does better; the shoe has a grounded contact shadow, a strong reflection aligned beneath it, and warm sunset illumination that consistently affects the shoe and wet surface. Right has plausible dusk lighting and reflected highlights, but the dark shape beneath the toe and sole reads more like an overly solid duplicate silhouette than a natural wet reflection.
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
Both models start at 25 credits, so the minimum generation cost is the same. In this run’s small latency sample, seedream 4.5 ranged from 21220 ms to 52476 ms, while Seedream 5 Pro ranged from 38569 ms to 141015 ms; these are observed samples, not benchmark figures.
How we compared & disclosure
We used one fixed prompt per scenario and made one run with each model for each scenario, then published the outputs as generated. Banana Pie sells paid access to both models.
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.