Wan 2.1 vs. 2.2: A Deep Dive Comparison
A decision-making tool to help you make a strategic choice between two groundbreaking video models.
Core Metrics at a Glance
The following table summarizes the core differences between the two models across key dimensions.
| Feature / Metric | Wan 2.1 (Established) | Wan 2.2 (Revolutionary) |
|---|---|---|
| Core Architecture | Diffusion Transformer (DiT) | Mixture of Experts (MoE) |
| Primary Strengths | VACE editing module, mature LoRA ecosystem | Superior raw quality, cinematic camera movement |
| Hardware Barrier (14B Class) | High (Requires ≥16GB VRAM) | Similar (MoE architecture optimizes computational cost) |
| LoRA Compatibility | Fully Compatible | Incompatible (Architecture Change) |
| Temporal Consistency | Good, but has a recognizable style | Excellent, effectively reduces "AI flicker" |
| Best Use Cases | Stylized creation, character consistency | Pursuing realism, complex dynamic scenes |
Architectural Evolution: From DiT to MoE
The core revolution of Wan 2.2 is the introduction of the Mixture of Experts (MoE) architecture, which fundamentally changes the video generation workflow to break through the performance bottlenecks of a single model.
Wan 2.1: Monolithic Diffusion Transformer (DiT)
DiT Core
A single transformer model handles all denoising steps
Wan 2.2: Mixture of Experts (MoE)
High-Noise Expert (14B)
Responsible for building macro structure & motion
Low-Noise Expert (14B)
Responsible for refining details & temporal coherence
Performance Benchmarks: Cost vs. Efficiency
Hardware requirements are a key factor in determining model usability. The charts below show VRAM usage and generation time on typical hardware.
Peak VRAM Usage
720p Generation Time (Seconds)
The LoRA Compatibility Crisis: A Divided Ecosystem
Wan 2.2's architectural change brings a leap in performance but also breaks compatibility with the 2.1 LoRA ecosystem, forcing users into a difficult strategic choice.
Sticking with Wan 2.1
Embracing Wan 2.2
Strategic Advisor: Which Model is Right for You?
Based on your core needs, we offer the following recommendations.
If your priority is: Stylization & Character Consistency
When your project heavily relies on a specific artistic style or character consistency, we recommend choosing Wan 2.1. It boasts a vast and mature LoRA ecosystem, which is key to achieving precise visual control. Although the raw quality is slightly lower, its compatibility with community assets is an irreplaceable advantage.
If your priority is: Ultimate Realism & Camera Movement
When pursuing the ultimate in realism, motion fidelity, and cinematic camera control, we recommend choosing Wan 2.2. Its MoE architecture comprehensively surpasses 2.1 in these areas, making it the undisputed choice for creating highly realistic, complex dynamic scenes and professional-grade camera work.
If your priority is: Limited Hardware / Non-NVIDIA Platform
For users with limited hardware (e.g., 8-12GB VRAM) or those on non-NVIDIA platforms, we recommend starting with Wan 2.1. Its community support and workflows are relatively more mature, with more available low-VRAM optimization solutions (like quantization). While Wan 2.2 is efficient, its support for non-NVIDIA platforms is still incomplete and more complex to configure.