GenAI Benchmarks

“I want designs with real text”

Posters, flyers, social thumbnails and wordmarks where rendered text is the content, produced by your users or your automation. One misspelled headline makes the asset unusable.

The benchmark avocado mascot on a step ladder, straightening the letter A in a giant AURELIA headline
Scores

Recommended models

Same measurements as the main rankings, weighted for this job. The weight matrix is 100% covered by scored criteria (auto tier plus the interim Claude-VLM quality tier); any criterion still awaiting review is excluded and the weights renormalized, never faked.
Pilot dataset (pilot-0), weighted for text-heavy layouts.
  Use-case score Criteria covered $ / image
1. Seedream 5.0 Lite
Best fit
4.35 / 5 100% $0.020
2. Nano Banana 2 Lite 4.34 / 5 100% $0.020
3. Seedream 4.5 4.31 / 5 100% $0.048
4. GPT Image 1.5 4.16 / 5 100% $0.120
5. Nano Banana 2 4.15 / 5 100% $0.100
6. FLUX.2 4.13 / 5 100% $0.013
7. Gemini 2.5 Flash Image 4.12 / 5 100% $0.039
8. FLUX.2 [pro] 4.06 / 5 100% $0.040
9. FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo 4.06 / 5 100% $0.015
10. Qwen-Image 3.97 / 5 100% $0.030
11. Ideogram 3.0 3.84 / 5 100% $0.060
12. Nano Banana Pro 3.82 / 5 100% $0.360
13. Luma Photon 3.68 / 5 100% $0.019
14. Recraft V3 3.42 / 5 100% $0.040
15. Stable Diffusion 1.5 2.03 / 5 100% $0.010
Want the raw numbers instead? See the full model rankings
Methodology

How this is weighted

When the text is the content, nothing else can compensate for a broken glyph, so text accuracy takes several times the weight of any other criterion. Composition and adherence follow because a poster with perfect type still fails when the layout ignores the brief; the remaining criteria stay light because typography failures are the reason these jobs get regenerated.

Weights are provisional (pilot-0) and published in full; the reviewed matrix ships with the frozen suite. Read the methodology
  • Text Accuracy 40%
  • Composition 15%
  • Prompt Adherence 10%
  • Color Accuracy 10%
  • Resolution 10%
  • Cost 10%
  • Latency 5%
Evidence

The evidence: Seedream 5.0 Lite

Seedream 5.0 Lite takes the top spot where this job puts its weight: text accuracy at 4.9 / 5 (40% of the matrix), composition at 4.9 / 5 (15% of the matrix) and resolution at 5.0 / 5 (10% of the matrix).

The best-fit model's results on the benchmarks that matter for this use case. Click through for the full cross-model comparison.
Takeaway

The last mile: what no model delivers

Even the best model here occasionally breaks a line or drops a character, and every model below the top tier misspells routinely. Baked-in AI text cannot be corrected without regenerating the whole image. The reliable pattern is generating the visual and keeping headlines as editable text layers on a canvas, where a human or a template fixes the last word.

AI Editor

Generate with any model. Finish in the AI Editor.

Give your users the control they need to be productive with generative AI. The IMG.LY AI Editor turns text-heavy layouts generations into finished, on-spec assets: background removal, brand kits and editable text on a real canvas.

IMG.LY AI Editor: generative image tools next to manual editing controls on a canvas