Back to Video generation

Model comparison

Veo 3.1 vs LTX-2.3 Pro

Compare Veo 3.1 and LTX-2.3 Pro using the same provider-sourced video generation rubric. No mystery score and no invented benchmark ranking.

Facts checked September 4, 2026

Estimate your cost

Set your usage. Your estimate updates as you type.

Example: 8-second, 720p clips with audio. Models that do not support these settings will not receive an estimate.

How this estimate works

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.

Estimate your cost
ModelEstimated total (USD)
Veo 3.1Google$3.20
LTX-2.3 ProLightricksNo reviewed rate

Quick take

Veo 3.1

Google's preview video model for text-, image-, and video-guided generation with native audio and output options up to 4K.

Best for

  • Short cinematic clips with native audio
  • 4K experiments and video extension
  • Google-centric media pipelines

Watch out for

It remains a preview model. Regional person-generation rules, two-day server retention, and resolution/duration constraints need product-level handling.

LTX-2.3 Pro

LTX's mature full-workflow video model for generation plus Retake, Extend, Reframe, native audio, and first-to-last-frame control.

Best for

  • Video pipelines that need generation and editing
  • First-to-last-frame interpolation
  • Retake, Extend, and Reframe workflows

Watch out for

Generation, audio-to-video, and editing endpoints do not all share one rate or limit. Pick the exact route, resolution, frame rate, and duration before comparing it with 2.5 Fast or Pro.

Compare the published facts

Veo 3.1 vs LTX-2.3 Pro

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.

Video generationVeo 3.1LTX-2.3 Pro
Generation priceCurrent list price per generated second or the provider's closest billing unit.$0.40/s standard with audio$0.04/s 720p to $0.32/s 4K for text/image generation
Clip durationDocumented duration choices or maximum clip length.4, 6, or 8 secondsUp to 20 seconds depending on route and resolution
Maximum outputHighest provider-documented output resolution, with relevant constraints.Up to 4K; 1080p/4K require 8s4K
Native audioWhether the endpoint generates synchronized audio with video.YesYes on Pro
Input modesSupported text, image, video, reference, or motion inputs.Text, image, or video to videoText, image, audio; first/last frame; Retake, Extend, Reframe
Generation timeOnly shown when a provider publishes a range; not a Cody benchmark.Official range: 11s–6mNot published

How to choose

Compare the job, not the hype.

Start with the job you need to complete, then validate cost, access, and policy details on your exact provider route.

Veo 3.1

Google says paid Gemini API content is not used to improve its products. Generated videos are retained on the server for two days and should be downloaded during that window.

LTX-2.3 Pro

The reviewed public LTX model and pricing guides do not state one complete endpoint-specific retention or training-use commitment. Verify current account and enterprise terms for sensitive media.

Frequently asked questions

Veo 3.1 vs LTX-2.3 Pro FAQ

What is the main difference between Veo 3.1 and LTX-2.3 Pro?

Veo 3.1: Google's preview video model for text-, image-, and video-guided generation with native audio and output options up to 4K. LTX-2.3 Pro: LTX's mature full-workflow video model for generation plus Retake, Extend, Reframe, native audio, and first-to-last-frame control.

Should I choose Veo 3.1 or LTX-2.3 Pro?

Consider Veo 3.1 when your priority is Short cinematic clips with native audio. Consider LTX-2.3 Pro when your priority is Video pipelines that need generation and editing. Test both with your own data and provider route before committing.

Is this Veo 3.1 vs LTX-2.3 Pro comparison based on Cody benchmarks?

No. This comparison aligns provider-published facts for the Video generation category. It does not claim a universal winner or combine incompatible third-party benchmark scores.