FLUX.2 Pro
15 successful reviewed runs
- Average actual charge
- $0.050
- Average observed time
- 26.8s
5-scenario image API benchmark
FLUX.2 Pro vs Nano Banana 2
Compare 30 real API generations across product rendering, exact poster text, portraits, spatial instructions, and editorial illustration. Every scenario uses the same prompt and three runs per model.
Source model
FLUX.2 Pro
Real API benchmark data
30 generations · 5 scenarios · Human-reviewed
View methodology and source dataTested on 7/31/2026
Nano Banana 2
15 successful reviewed runs
- Average actual charge
- $0.085
- Average observed time
- 40.7s
FLUX.2 Pro
$0.050 · 25.2s
Human review
The bottle, amber liquid, condensation, metallic pedestal, warm transmitted light, and clean text-free studio composition are all present.
Nano Banana 2
$0.085 · 41.0s
Human review
The bottle, amber liquid, condensation, metallic pedestal, warm transmitted light, and clean text-free studio composition are all present.
How this comparison was run
Both APIs received the same English prompt for each scenario. Each model generated three independent results using its closest square default: FLUX.2 Pro at 1 MP and Nano Banana 2 at 1K. Times are client-observed totals, charges are reconciled from the HiAPI billing record, and every output was reviewed at full resolution.
A five-scenario, three-run sample helps reveal consistency but does not predict every prompt or provider update. Results are evidence from this dated dataset, not a permanent overall ranking.
Source data
Dataset ID: flux-2-pro-vs-nano-banana-2-2026-07-31