AI image models compared
Grok Imagine 2.0 vs Nano Banana
Both do reference-image editing, and they are good at different halves of it. Grok Imagine 2.0 takes up to five reference images at once and is the better compositor — combining elements from several sources into one new image, and the only model here that reliably renders readable text. Nano Banana takes one image and changes it conversationally, holding identity across the edit.
Put another way: Grok 2.0 is better at building an image out of parts, Nano Banana is better at evolving one image over many steps. A product shoot that needs the product, a background and a logo merged goes to Grok 2.0. A comic where panel six needs the same face as panel one goes to Nano Banana.
Choose Grok Imagine 2.0 if
- The image contains words that must be legible
- You are compositing from several reference images
- The prompt has precise spatial instructions
Choose Nano Banana if
- One subject has to stay identical across many edits
- You want to iterate by describing changes in plain words
- Storyboards, comics, product variants
Side by side
| Grok Imagine 2.0 | Nano Banana | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | 420 credits | 670 credits |
| Roughly | about 39c | about 62c |
| Provider | xAI | fal |
| Aspect ratios | 13 — 1:1, 4:3, 16:9, 3:2, 19.5:9, 20:9, 2:1, 3:4, 9:16, 2:3, 9:19.5, 9:20, 1:2 | 10 — 1:1, 4:3, 16:9, 3:2, 5:4, 21:9, 3:4, 9:16, 2:3, 4:5 |
| Resolutions | 1k, 2k | — |
| LoRA support | No | No |
| Modes | generate, edit, multi-edit | generate |
Specifications are measured against each endpoint, not copied from a vendor page. Cash figures are approximate at starter-pack rates — see pricing. Highlighted rows are where the two models differ.
Try either one
Open Grok Imagine 2.0Open Nano Banana
New accounts start with free credits, and credits never expire. Read more about Grok Imagine 2.0 or Nano Banana, or see every model on comfyarts.