2.5 is better than 2.6

I've been playing with it for the last hour or so. I immediately updated my platform to use both since 2.5 is my primary model (i run a prompt->design site).

After playing with it for an hour, I'm rolling back 2.6-flare to 2.5-flare. I've found 2.6-flare specifically to either be too simplistic in its approaches, or create outputs that are inherently broken in other cases.

Comparison examples: https://diffui.ai/app/canvas/178db5d5-ff87-4b43-aa98-2897773...

2.6-sunburst seems solid however.

Update: seems to be confirmed on arena.ai - 2.5 scores higher than 2.6 https://arena.ai/leaderboard/image/text-to-image

▲

jjcm 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Update: based on info from design arena, it looks like gpt-image-2.6 was post-trained to output less text: https://x.com/DesignArena/status/2118124381155303918

This may be why text elements in particular appear more "zoomed in", and why it's providing less detail for UI design.

	▲	ChickeNES 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Oh thank god, the awful inspirational text shoved needlessly into everything has been excised.

▲

Computer0 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I preferred 2.6 in all examples supplied!

	▲	jjcm 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I firmly disagree. There's subjective comparison, and there's objective comparison. In two of the examples the images from 2.6 are inherently broken, ie: https://image.non.io/161d8f02-fc2a-40e0-91b2-9d27ceb8fef1.we... Objectively there are tests here where 2.5 are better. Subjectively prefering the layout of 2.6 is fine, but there are blocking flaws.