ByteDance 出品
Seedance 2.0 Fast
更快的 Seedance 2.0，720p 有聲
17 點起 （5 秒影片）
模型比較
Seedance 2.0 Fast vs Seedance 2.0: Draft Tier or Full Model?
Same prompt, same 720p settings: full Seedance 2.0 gave the more finished clip, a closer and steadier tracking shot with a readable laugh, a basket on the bike, the baker waving and the canal revealed at the end. Fast got the wave too, but in a darker, more distant shot where you mostly see her back. Seedance 2.0 took about three minutes against two for Fast and costs more per second, and only Seedance 2.0 can go to 1080p and 4K. Use Fast to find the shot, Seedance 2.0 to deliver it. In two extra prompts against Seedance 2.0's 480p draft clips, Fast tied the rooftop party and kept the jelly cubes truer to the brief.
Seedance 2.0 is ByteDance's main video model: 4 to 15 second clips from 480p up to 4K, with sound, reference scenes and clip extension. Seedance 2.0 Fast is the speed tier of the same model, with the same controls but a 720p ceiling. People often search for this as Seedance 2.0 Fast vs normal; below, both run the same prompt.
一眼看懂
| Seedance 2.0 Fast | Seedance 2.0 | |
|---|---|---|
| 出品方 | ByteDance | ByteDance |
| 模式 | 生成影片、圖生影片、參考生影片和影片延伸 | 生成影片、圖生影片、參考生影片和影片延伸 |
| 最高解析度 | 720p | 4K |
| 影片長度 | 4–15s | 4–15s |
| 聲音 | 有 | 有 |
| 參考圖 | 9 | 9 |
| 起價 | 17 點 （5 秒影片） | 33 點 （5 秒影片） |
Seedance 2.0 Fast vs Seedance 2.0 on the same prompts
Round one ran both at 720p, 16:9, five seconds with sound, so the only difference is the tier. In rounds two and three Fast ran at 720p against Seedance 2.0 clips from our earlier family test at its 480p draft size, so compare framing and motion there, not sharpness. Times include the queue.
Round 1 · Rainy street, two people, sound
A woman in her sixties with silver curly hair and a yellow raincoat cycles slowly along a wet cobblestone canal street at dusk. She rings her bicycle bell and laughs as a bearded man in a green apron waves from a bakery doorway. Smooth tracking shot from the side, warm shop lights reflecting on the wet stones, light drizzle, ambient sound of rain, the bell and distant chatter.
Fast: a dark, moody grade, the camera behind her, the baker waving from a lit doorway. Seedance 2.0: warm dusk light, a close tracking shot on her laughing face, a basket on the handlebars, the baker waving, and the canal coming into view at the end.
Round 2 · Rooftop party with a spoken toast
A summer rooftop party in Brooklyn at blue hour, string lights and the Manhattan skyline behind. A mixed group of friends in their late twenties and thirties dance and laugh: a woman with long braids spins under a man's arm, two men clink beer bottles, someone throws a handful of confetti. One continuous handheld shot weaving through the dancers, ending as the whole group raises their drinks and shouts together, "To summer!" Sound: upbeat funk music, chatter, laughter, bottles clinking.
Both landed the spin, the clinking bottles, the confetti and the closing toast. Fast's 720p take is the sharper one and moves like a handheld camera among the guests; Seedance 2.0, at its 480p draft size, is softer but adds a playful swing up into the falling confetti. Even overall.
Round 3 · Puppy chasing a splitting jelly cube
A golden retriever puppy chases a giant wobbling orange jelly cube across a sunlit park lawn. The cube bounces, squashes on landing and splits into three smaller glossy cubes that scatter in different directions; the puppy skids to a stop, tilts its head and pounces on the nearest one. Low tracking camera at grass height, shallow depth of field, warm afternoon light. Sound: excited barks, squishy bounces, birdsong.
Fast kept the jelly looking like cubes for longest and showed it squashing on landing before the split. Seedance 2.0's pieces came out as ridged dessert-mould shapes. Both puppies finish with a pounce.
我們看到的差別
- Detail and faces
- Seedance 2.0 framed her closer and kept the face sharp enough to read the laugh, along with hair and scarf detail. Fast kept her at a distance and mostly from behind.
- Hitting the prompt
- Seedance 2.0 landed the most beats: dusk, drizzle, the laugh, the wave and the canal. Fast landed the wave and the rain but lost the face and the canal.
- Render time
- In our run Seedance 2.0 took 194 seconds and Fast 121, queue included. Over a session of ten drafts, that difference adds up.
- Resolution ceiling
- Fast tops out at 720p. Seedance 2.0 adds 1080p and 4K, which matters for a hero shot on a big screen and not at all for a phone feed.
- Workflow
- Because the settings are the same, the prompt moves over unchanged. Draft on Fast until the action and camera work, then rerun the keeper on Seedance 2.0 at the resolution you need.
- Light and colour
- Seedance 2.0 held the blue-hour sky and warm shop light at the same time, which is hard to get right. Fast pushed the whole frame toward night, so the bakery glowed but the street fell into shadow.
- Sound
- Both returned a generated ambient track with rain and street atmosphere, on by default. If you plan to score the clip yourself, switch sound off on either tier before you generate.
Seedance 2.0 Fast or Seedance 2.0: which to choose
| If you need | Pick | Why |
|---|---|---|
| A 1080p or 4K deliverable | Seedance 2.0 | Fast tops out at 720p. |
| Several drafts while the shot is still changing | Seedance 2.0 Fast | Lower price per second and about a minute quicker in our run. |
| A close-up where the expression carries the moment | Seedance 2.0 | It kept her laugh sharp and readable; Fast stayed far back. |
| Dusk light that keeps both sky and shop windows | Seedance 2.0 | Fast pushed the whole street toward night. |
| Reference photos, clips and voice tracks | Either | Both accept nine pictures, three clips and three audio files. |
選 Seedance 2.0 Fast，如果你要
- Finding the action and framing before a final render
- Social clips where 720p is enough
- Quick turnaround over maximum detail
選 Seedance 2.0，如果你要
- Final renders at 1080p or 4K
- Close shots where faces and expressions must read
- Client deliverables and hero shots
提示詞建議
- Keep the prompt identical when you move from Fast to Seedance 2.0, so you're judging the model, not a new prompt.
- Ask for the camera position you want (“in front of her, slightly to the side”). Fast drifted behind the subject on a vaguer instruction.
- Both tiers take a seed. Keep the seed fixed while you change one word of the prompt, so you can see what that word actually did.
- Name the time of day and the light source together (“dusk, warm light spilling from the bakery window”). Fast went much darker than Seedance 2.0 on the word “dusk” alone.
各自的真實範例
這裡的每張圖、每段影片都是用 Seedance 2.0 Fast / Seedance 2.0 生成的。按「做同款」會帶著同樣的提示詞和設定打開生成頁。
Seedance 2.0 Fast
原圖參考生影片
需要上傳你自己的圖片
原圖圖生影片
需要上傳你自己的圖片
原圖圖生影片
需要上傳你自己的圖片
Seedance 2.0
原圖參考生影片
需要上傳你自己的圖片
關於 Seedance 2.0 Fast vs Seedance 2.0 的常見問題
Seedance 2.0 Fast 比 Seedance 2.0 好嗎？
Same prompt, same 720p settings: full Seedance 2.0 gave the more finished clip, a closer and steadier tracking shot with a readable laugh, a basket on the bike, the baker waving and the canal revealed at the end. Fast got the wave too, but in a darker, more distant shot where you mostly see her back. Seedance 2.0 took about three minutes against two for Fast and costs more per second, and only Seedance 2.0 can go to 1080p and 4K. Use Fast to find the shot, Seedance 2.0 to deliver it. In two extra prompts against Seedance 2.0's 480p draft clips, Fast tied the rooftop party and kept the jelly cubes truer to the brief.
Seedance 2.0 Fast 和 Seedance 2.0 哪個比較便宜？
在 PopNow 上 Seedance 2.0 Fast 起價較低：34 點，另一個是 53 點（5 秒影片）。兩者都是尺寸越大、長度越長越貴，生成前會顯示準確價格。
Is Seedance 2.0 Fast lower quality than Seedance 2.0?
On our prompt, yes: Fast's clip was darker, more distant and less detailed, while Seedance 2.0 kept the face readable and hit more of the brief. Fast is still a solid draft tier at a lower price per second.
Can I upscale a Fast clip instead of rerunning it in Seedance 2.0?
You can run it through Upscale Video, which sharpens what's already there. It won't add the detail and prompt accuracy that Seedance 2.0 draws, so for a hero shot rerun the prompt on Seedance 2.0.
How long does each take?
In our run a 5-second 720p clip took about two minutes on Fast and about three on Seedance 2.0, queue included. Longer clips and higher resolutions take longer on both.
Is it worth paying more for Seedance 2.0 at 720p?
For a hero shot, yes: at the same 720p it gave a closer, better-lit and more faithful clip in our test. For b-roll, drafts and anything shown small on a phone, Fast at 720p is usually enough.
Do both support references and clip extension?
Yes. Both take up to nine reference images, three clips and three audio tracks, and both can extend a clip from its last frame. Only the resolution ceiling and the per-second price differ.
Which should I pick for a client project?
Draft the shot list on Fast, show the client the 720p takes, and render only the approved shots on Seedance 2.0 at 1080p or 4K. You pay the higher rate once per shot instead of on every experiment, and the prompt carries over word for word.
Does Seedance 2.0 Fast cut corners on motion?
Not visibly in our clip: the bike moved smoothly and the drizzle read as rain on both. What Fast gave up was framing and light, keeping the subject farther away and darker, rather than producing jerky or melting movement.
這次測試花了多少？
依上面的設定，跑一次 Seedance 2.0 Fast 要 73 點，Seedance 2.0 要 114 點。就是開始前生成按鈕上顯示的價格。
Seedance 2.0 Fast 和 Seedance 2.0 可以一起用嗎？
可以。一個 PopNow 帳號、一份點數就能用兩個模型，在生成頁隨時切換，不用重寫提示詞。