Wan 2.7 vs Wan 3.0: clip length and resolution limits by model id
Wan 2.7 tops out at 15 s and starts at 720P; Wan 3.0 reaches 30 s and adds 480P. Alibaba's ids side by side, and which one Sume lists.

Wan 3.0 is the longer and cheaper-to-draft model: 2 to 30 seconds at 480P, 720P and 1080P. Wan 2.7 text-to-video and image-to-video stop at 15 seconds and start at 720P. On Sume only Wan 3.0 is in the video catalog (wan-3.0); I found no Wan 2.7 id there.
The two lines side by side
Alibaba's video generation model list shows the following for the Wan family.
| Model id | Clip length | Resolution |
|---|---|---|
| wan3.0-video | 2 to 30 s | 480P to 1080P |
| wan3.0-video-prime | 2 to 30 s | 480P to 1080P |
| wan2.7-t2v / wan2.7-i2v | 2 to 15 s | 720P, 1080P |
| wan2.7-r2v-2026-06-12 | 2 to 10 s | See page |
| wan2.7-videoedit | 2 to 10 s | See page |
What changes in practice
- A cheap draft: Wan 3.0 can render at 480P. Wan 2.7 text-to-video and image-to-video cannot go below 720P.
- A longer shot: Wan 3.0 reaches 30 seconds in one pass, double Wan 2.7's 15.
- Reference and edit work: Wan 2.7 has separate reference-to-video and video-edit ids, each capped at 10 seconds.
What Sume exposes
wan-3.0 accepts 2 to 30 seconds at 480p, 720p and 1080p, with audio, first and last frames, and image, video and audio references. Sume does not list wan2.7-videoedit; for editing a source clip, Sume's route is the video_url edit mode of Gemini Omni Flash 1.1, described in the Sume docs. If you need a Wan 2.7 id specifically, call Alibaba.
Picking a version for a project
A storyboard of 8 to 12 second shots works on either version, but the 720P floor of Wan 2.7 text-to-video means you cannot make cheap 480P proofs there. A single 25-second continuous shot works only on Wan 3.0. An edit job on an existing clip is the one place the older id has a named product on Alibaba's list, and the page I read lists no Wan 3.0 video-edit id.
If you are on Sume, the choice is already made for you: wan-3.0 is the Wan id, and its documented limits are the ones in this post. Read GET /v1/videos/models before sending a duration so you do not get a rejected request for a value outside 2 to 30.
Sources
Related posts
More in Comparisons
- Wan 3.0 or Seedance 2.5: which one for which brief
Pick Wan 3.0 for cheap 2 to 30 s drafts and heavy reference sets; pick Seedance 2.5 for ByteDance's long-take behavior. A decision table from Sume's catalog.
- Wan 3.0 per-clip cost: Sume API vs Runway credits
Wan 3.0 is $0.0625 to $0.25 per second on Sume. Runway's page shows 5 to 20 credits per second at $0.01 per credit. Per-clip math inside.
- Wan 3.0 vs Seedance 2.5 at 30 seconds: the price gap on Sume
A 30-second 720p clip costs $3.75 on Wan 3.0 and about $17.33 on Seedance 2.5 on Sume, a gap of 4.6x. A table across resolutions and what else differs.
- 20-second highlight reel: Seedance 2.5 at $5.38 vs Wan 3.0 at $2.50
A 20-second highlight clip costs $5.38 on seedance-2.5 at 480p and $2.50 on wan-3.0 at 720p on Sume. Use video references to keep the look.
Written by Sume