Title: FLUX Comparison: SCHNELL vs DEV
Today, we’ll compare two versions of the FLUX model: FLUX DEV and FLUX SCHNELL. These versions exhibit significant differences in prompt understanding and image quality. We will explore their distinctions, particularly in their performance for inpainting tasks and the ability to create consistent characters with varying facial expressions. Additionally, we will review updates that make these models more accessible for computers with less RAM.
admin
8/28/20242 min read
Recent updates to FLUX models have reduced their download sizes by half. This change makes it easier for computers with lower RAM to handle these models. If you’ve installed previous versions, you only need to download and place the new models in the `model/unet` folder. Other components like the t5x XL and the VA remain unchanged. Remember that FLUX DEV is for non-commercial use only, while FLUX SCHNELL supports commercial projects. The key difference between the two is that FLUX DEV is set to 20 steps, compared to the 4 steps of FLUX SCHNELL.
Image Quality and Prompt Understanding
When comparing images generated by FLUX DEV and FLUX SCHNELL, the differences are striking. For example, in a recent test, images from FLUX DEV displayed more dramatic and engaging qualities compared to FLUX SCHNELL. In the case of a pixel easel logo prompt, the results from FLUX DEV were notably more refined and detailed. FLUX DEV consistently produces images with higher photographic quality, capturing finer details and more realistic atmospheres than FLUX SCHNELL.
Inpainting and Image Adjustments
Inpainting, the technique used to alter specific parts of an image, shows a clear advantage with FLUX DEV. While FLUX SCHNELL struggled to produce usable results, FLUX DEV delivered impressive, coherent changes. This model excelled in integrating new elements seamlessly into existing images. For instance, adjusting facial expressions in images was more successful with FLUX DEV, producing consistent character portrayals with different moods. These results highlight FLUX DEV’s superior ability to handle complex adjustments compared to FLUX SCHNELL.
Resolution and Image-to-Image Comparison
Resolution plays a critical role in the output quality of both models. Tests showed that while FLUX SCHNELL provided good results, FLUX DEV produced more realistic and detailed images, especially when adjusting resolutions. In image-to-image tasks, FLUX DEV offered greater flexibility and quality, making it a better choice for projects requiring high realism. The differences in denoise handling and overall image quality underscore FLUX DEV's higher performance level.
Conclusion
In summary, FLUX DEV outperforms FLUX SCHNELL in several key areas, including image quality, inpainting capabilities, and prompt understanding. The advancements in FLUX DEV make it a superior choice for high-quality and realistic image generation, although it’s important to remember its non-commercial use restriction. FLUX SCHNELL, while still effective, does not match the level of detail and accuracy provided by FLUX DEV. For those seeking the highest quality in their AI-generated images, FLUX DEV is the preferred option.
Try FLUX
Replicate:
FAL:
Mystic:
We are a non-profit community of AI enthusiasts and researchers dedicated to exploring and advancing the latest in generative AI technology. We are not affiliated with BlackForestLabs.ai