Krea 3
The flagship- Prompt adherence that follows the brief
- Multi-reference editing that preserves identity
- Legible short text —labels, posters, signage
- The pick for finals and client deliverables
Krea 3: Fast AI Photo Editing in Native 2K
Change scenes, materials, and lighting while preserving product details and character identity. Native 2K output and multi-reference editing turn one creative direction into a coherent set.
Verdict
The short answer
Both models take a text brief and return a visual. What differs is the tuning: Krea 3 is built for faithful direction and native 2K detail; GPT Image 2 is the fast everyday tier.
GPT Image 2
The fast tier- Quick drafts for exploring directions
- The cheaper loop for comparing ideas
- Wide aspect-ratio coverage
- The right default for rapid ideation
Explore on GPT Image 2, finish on Krea 3. The same prompt carries over between engines, so the split workflow costs you nothing.
Specs
Spec sheet, side by side
Pulled from the live model catalog —what you see is what the studio actually submits.
 Krea 3 |  GPT Image 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Positioning | Flagship —direction and consistency | Everyday tier —fast drafts |
| Resolutions | 1K · 2K · 4K | 1K · 2K · 4K |
| Aspect ratios | auto · 1:1 · 3:2 · 2:3 · 4:3 · 3:4 · 16:9 · 9:16 · 21:9 · 27:16 · 16:27 · 9:8 · 8:9 | auto · 1:1 · 5:4 · 9:16 · 21:9 · 16:9 · 4:3 · 3:2 · 4:5 · 3:4 · 2:3 |
| Max reference images | Up to 4 | Up to 4 |
| Modes | Text to image 路 Image to image | Text to image 路 Image to image |
| Best at | Product edits, text in frame, native 2K | Quick concepts, style exploration |
| Credit cost | from 4 credits | from 4 credits |
| Typical pick | Finals, product shots, campaign visuals | Drafts, variants, idea loops |
AI Model 4 credits
Prompt0/2000
Avoid copyrighted characters, logos, music and sensitive or explicit content — it may be blocked.
Resolution
Aspect Ratio
Batch generation1
Estimated cost: 4 credits
Your creation appears here
Pick a model, describe the shot, and hit Generate.
Test it yourself
The same-prompt test bench
Every test below loads an identical prompt into the studio. Run it on Krea 3, switch the model to GPT Image 2, run it again —the difference is yours to judge.
Tip: keep the render at 1K for the A/B pass, then re-run the winner at 2K or 4K.
Product fidelity
ProductA matte ceramic pour-over coffee set on a walnut table —morning window light, soft shadows, editorial product photography, warm tones.
What to compare: Whether the label, materials, and proportions stay true while the scene changes.
Text in frame
TypeA minimalist poster for a ceramics studio —the headline "EARTH & GLAZE" in large serif type, terracotta palette, soft studio light, generous whitespace.
What to compare: Letterforms —are the words spelled right and kerned cleanly at render size.
Skin & expression
PortraitPortrait of an elderly fisherman with a weathered face —overcast harbor light, wind in his jacket, shallow depth of field, documentary feel.
What to compare: Skin texture and catchlights —does the face read as photographed or smoothed.
Scene density
SceneA cozy ramen shop interior at night —hanging lanterns, steam rising from bowls, rain streaking the window, a cat asleep on a stool, warm cinematic light.
What to compare: How many elements stay coherent —small details in the background either hold or smear.
Deep dive
An honest breakdown of Krea 3 vs GPT Image 2
Comparison articles love declaring a winner. These two models are not really competitors —they are two rungs of the same ladder, and the useful question is which rung a given visual belongs on. Here is what actually differs once you run the same brief through both.
Same studio, different tuning
Krea 3 and GPT Image 2 share the studio: the same prompt box, the same wallet, the same credit estimate previewed before every run. Where they diverge is tuning. Krea 3 is optimized for direction —edits that land where you asked, products that stay recognizable, and text that comes out spelled right.
GPT Image 2 trades some of that control for turnaround. It takes a prompt and returns a visual fast, which makes it the cheaper loop for exploring ideas before you commit to a direction.
Where the difference actually shows
On simple subjects the two engines are closer than marketing suggests —a clean object on a plain background looks good on either. The gap opens when the brief asks for something: a label that must stay readable, a face that must stay consistent, a scene with typography. That is where directed control and consistency pay for themselves.
A practical reading of the results: if the GPT Image 2 draft already ships, you are done. If the visual is headed for a hero slot or a client deck, re-run the same prompt on Krea 3 and compare.
The two-model workflow
The cheapest way to use both engines is to treat them as stages, not rivals. Explore on GPT Image 2: vary the prompt, test compositions, and run two or three candidate directions. Once a direction wins, re-run the identical prompt on Krea 3 for the final render. Because both models live in one studio and share the same wallet, nothing about the brief needs to change.
The same applies to editing. Rough in the idea from a text prompt, then hand the winning still to Krea 3’s image-to-image for a controlled final pass.
Credits and cost control
Every generation in the studio shows its credit estimate before you run, and the estimate updates as you switch models —the spec table above reads live values from the same catalog. Failed generations refund their credits automatically, so an A/B test only ever costs the successful renders.
For most users the pattern that keeps spend low is simple: draft at 1K on GPT Image 2, and reserve Krea 3 renders for visuals that have already earned their prompt.
FAQ
Krea 3 vs GPT Image 2 FAQ
Understand the model, prepare better references, and choose a practical approach to your next visual.
01Is Krea 3 or GPT Image 2 better?
Neither is strictly better —they are tuned for different stages. GPT Image 2 wins on speed and iteration cost for drafts; Krea 3 wins on direction, consistency, and legible text for final renders.
02Does GPT Image 2 support image editing?
Yes —both models take reference uploads in Image to Image mode. Krea 3 holds product and character identity more reliably across heavy edits.
03Is Krea 3 more expensive?
It costs more credits per render —the exact estimate for your settings is shown in the studio before every run. The spec table on this page reads the live catalog values.
04Can I run the same prompt on both models?
Yes —that is the point of the test bench above. Each case loads an identical prompt; run it on GPT Image 2, switch the model selector to Krea 3, and run it again to compare.
05Which should I use for a client deliverable?
Krea 3 —its direction and consistency advantage is most visible when a visual is inspected closely or shipped in paid work.
06Do my credits work on both models?
Yes. Credits are shared across every model in the studio —the same wallet pays for drafts on GPT Image 2 and finals on Krea 3.
Make the next idea visible
Start your next visual on Krea 3
Bring a product photo, a character, or a clear scene brief. Explore a version, refine the direction, and save a visual that fits your layout.