Model comparison
Compare GPT-Image-2.5 Flare and Arrow 2 using the same provider-sourced image generation rubric. No mystery score and no invented benchmark ranking.
Facts checked September 19, 2026
Set your usage. Your estimate updates as you type.
Example output: square 1,024 × 1,024 images. Prices depend on supported resolution and quality; edits and retries can cost extra.
Estimates exclude taxes, tools, cache storage/writes, free allowances and custom discounts. Image estimates cover output only, not prompt or reference-image charges. Quality modes differ by model. Unlisted settings are not treated as free.
| Model | Access | Pricing & comparisons |
|---|---|---|
| Arrow 2QuiverAI | QuiverAI | $4 input · $20 output / 1M tokens |
| GPT-Image-2.5 FlareOpenAI | OpenAI | $5 text input · $8 image input · $30 image output / 1M tokens |
Quick take
OpenAI's speed-first GPT Image 2.5 model for everyday generation and editing, positioned at GPT Image 2-level image quality with lower latency.
Flare's speed positioning is a provider claim, not a fixed latency guarantee. Run repeated tests with the same prompt, references, dimensions, and quality before moving production traffic.
QuiverAI's flagship model for turning prompts, images, and existing SVGs into editable vector graphics and micro-animations.
QuiverAI has not published independent quality or speed benchmarks with a reproducible methodology. Test path cleanliness, text and font handling, animation portability, retry rate, and cost per accepted asset. New organizations also default to allowing storage and training until an administrator changes the data controls.
Compare the published facts
Values use each provider's own published units and limits. A blank means the provider did not publish a directly comparable value in the sources reviewed.
| Image generation | GPT-Image-2.5 Flare | Arrow 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Typical price basisA representative current provider price with its quality or resolution basis. | OpenAI: $5 text input · $8 image input · $30 image output / 1M tokens | $4 input · $20 output / 1M tokens |
| Maximum outputMaximum documented resolution or pixel area for the listed route. | Up to 3,840px per edge / 8.29MP | Resolution-independent editable SVG |
| Core tasksWhether the model supports generation, editing, or both. | Generation and editing | Generate, edit, vectorize, and animate SVG |
| Reference imagesHow the model can use images to guide or edit an output. | Image inputs with improved subject preservation | Up to 14 reference images |
| Text & layoutProvider-documented positioning for typography and structured composition. | Exact-text and structured-layout workflows | Structured SVG output; test fonts, paths, and editable text |
| API accessDirect and notable third-party routes included in this guide. | OpenAI Images API, Responses tool | Quiver app, direct API, and Vercel AI Gateway |
How to choose
Start with the job you need to complete, then validate cost, access, and policy details on your exact provider route.
OpenAI says direct API inputs and outputs are not used for model training by default. Standard abuse-monitoring retention and organization-specific data controls still apply.
Provider and API links
New QuiverAI organizations default to allowing storage and model training. Organization and project settings can restrict data to benchmark storage without training or forbid storage, with the strictest setting taking precedence. QuiverAI says SOC 2, ISO 27001, SSO/SAML, and SCIM are not currently available.
Frequently asked questions
GPT-Image-2.5 Flare: OpenAI's speed-first GPT Image 2.5 model for everyday generation and editing, positioned at GPT Image 2-level image quality with lower latency. Arrow 2: QuiverAI's flagship model for turning prompts, images, and existing SVGs into editable vector graphics and micro-animations.
Consider GPT-Image-2.5 Flare when your priority is Fast everyday image generation. Consider Arrow 2 when your priority is Editable icons, illustrations, and design-system assets. Test both with your own data and provider route before committing.
No. This comparison aligns provider-published facts for the Image generation category. It does not claim a universal winner or combine incompatible third-party benchmark scores.
