Ray 3.2 vs Wan 3.0
Almost every comparison of Ray 3.2 and Wan 3.0 on the internet is written from two launch announcements. This one is written from our catalogue: the specifications below are the records the studio sells from, read when the page is served, so they cannot go stale. Both clips were generated on Musevate, each from its own prompt, shown under it — so they show what each model does, not a like-for-like test. Nothing here is taken from either vendor’s reel, which is always the best of many attempts.
Both cost 25 credits for five seconds, so price does not separate them.
Wan 3.0 generates its own sound and Ray 3.2 does not. If the clip has to be heard rather than scored afterwards, that is not a preference, it is the decision.
Neither is declared the winner anywhere on this page. Where a row has a better answer — a lower price, a longer clip, a larger render — it is marked, and the rest is left unmarked, because sound, mode support and the look of the output are differences rather than rankings.
Specifications read from the Musevate catalogue when this page loaded. Both clips were generated on Musevate, each from its own prompt, shown under it — so they show what each model does, not a like-for-like test.
Both, on the same platform
The part no specification table can give you. Each clip below came out of Musevate through the same pipeline, and the prompt that produced it is underneath.
Side by side
Every figure here is read from our catalogue — the records the studio sells from — when the page is served, so it cannot drift the way a written comparison does. Where a row has a better answer it is marked; where it does not, both are shown plainly rather than scored.
| Ray 3.2 | Wan 3.0 | |
|---|---|---|
| Price for a 5 second clip | 25 credits at 720p | 25 credits at 720p |
| Longest clip | 10 seconds | 10 seconds |
| Highest resolution | 1080p | 1080p |
| Generates sound | No | On request, with audio switched on |
| Text to video | Yes | Yes |
| Animates an image you upload | Yes | Yes |
| Takes reference images | No | Yes |
| Example generated on Musevate | Yes | Yes |
Prices are credits for a five second clip at 720p. Ray 3.2 and Wan 3.0 each have a full page with the rest of their specification.
Questions
Should I use Ray 3.2 or Wan 3.0?
It depends on the shot, and any page answering that without knowing what you are making is guessing. The honest way to choose is to run the same prompt through both — on Musevate that is two generations from one balance. The two clips on this page were each made from their own prompt, so they show what each model does rather than settling it. The differences above are the ones worth deciding on before you spend anything.
Is Wan 3.0 worth the extra over Ray 3.2?
They cost the same here — 25 credits for five seconds at 720p — so there is no extra to justify. Choose on the differences above.
Do I have to choose one on Musevate?
No. Both are in the same catalogue on the same balance, and the router will pick between them for you if you would rather describe the shot than the model. Picking by hand is there when you want it and never required.
Which is cheaper, Ray 3.2 or Wan 3.0?
They cost the same on Musevate: 25 credits for a five second clip at 720p. The choice between them is about what they produce, not what they cost.
Which makes longer clips, Ray 3.2 or Wan 3.0?
Both accept up to 10 seconds in one generation.
Do Ray 3.2 and Wan 3.0 generate sound?
Wan 3.0 does; the other returns pictures only, and anything you hear over it has to be added afterwards.
Can I use both Ray 3.2 and Wan 3.0 on one account?
Yes. Musevate is one account and one credit balance across every model, so comparing them costs nothing beyond the two generations. That is how the two clips on this page were made.
Run the comparison yourself
Both models are on one account with one balance. Ray 3.2 is 25 credits for five seconds at 720p; Wan 3.0 is 25.
Create your first video