Two premium image models, both on the same account, pulling in different directions. One is what you reach for when the picture contains words. The other is what you reach for when the brief contains rules.
Choose Nano Banana Pro when the image has to contain legible text, or when you are blending more than four references. Choose GPT Image 2 when the brief is a list of literal requirements that all have to land, or when the output has to look commercially finished with no clean-up.
This is the most common fork in the model picker, and it is not a quality question. Both are flagship models from the two labs with the most to prove, and on an open-ended prompt like a landscape or a portrait you would struggle to call a winner. The fork matters because they fail differently, and knowing how a model fails is worth more than knowing how it succeeds.
Nano Banana Pro, Google's premium image tier, is the only model on the platform that reliably renders words as part of an image rather than as something smeared across it. GPT Image 2, OpenAI's image model, is the most literal: give it a count, a placement and a framing and it will respect all three. Those two strengths rarely need to be in the same picture, which is what makes the choice clean.
| Nano Banana Pro | GPT Image 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Made by | OpenAI | |
| Model ID | gemini-3-pro-image | gpt-image-2 |
| Credits | 10 credits (per image) | 8 credits (per image) |
| Cost on a credit pack | $0.16 to $0.19 per image | $0.13 to $0.15 per image |
| Aspect ratios | 1:1, 3:4, 4:3, 16:9, 9:16 | 1:1, 3:4, 4:3, 16:9, 9:16 |
| Reference images per prompt | Up to 6 | Up to 4 |
| Speed | Standard | Standard |
| Best at | In-image text and detail | Product and commercial |
Read more about each model: Nano Banana Pro and GPT Image.
Text inside a generated image is the hardest thing any of these models do, and it is the dimension with the widest spread between them. Nano Banana Pro is the model we point at posters, book covers, infographics, ad creative and anything with a headline, because it renders short strings correctly often enough to be a production tool rather than a lottery.
GPT Image 2 handles text better than the cheaper models, and for a single short word on a sign it is usually fine. For a headline plus a subtitle plus a price, the gap opens. The practical rule: if the words in the brief are the point of the image, start on Nano Banana Pro and do not spend credits proving it to yourself.
Both models degrade on long text. Neither will set a paragraph. If your image needs a block of body copy, generate the picture on either model and composite the type afterwards, which is what the Social and Content Studio and the Poster Maker do by design rather than asking a model to do something no model does well.
Prompt obedience sounds like a soft quality until you are generating to a spec. Three products on a shelf, not four. The logo in the upper left, not centred. Shot from slightly below, not eye level. GPT Image 2 follows literal instructions, including counts, placement and framing, more reliably than the other models here, and that is the specific reason it is the default on the product and commercial tools.
Nano Banana Pro holds onto multi-clause instructions well, noticeably better than the Flash tier, and layout directions like a title at the top with a subtitle below do land. Where it differs is in the conservatism of its compliance: it interprets, and interpretation is what you want from an art director and not what you want from a spec sheet.
There is a corollary worth knowing before you spend credits. GPT Image 2 runs the strictest content filtering on the platform, so prompts involving real people, recognisable brands or edgy themes get refused more often. A refusal costs you nothing, because failed runs refund automatically, but it costs you time. If your subject sits anywhere near that line, Nano Banana Pro will usually just do the job.
Both models take reference images, and the ceiling is different. The gap sounds trivial and is not, because reference slots get consumed faster than people expect on brand work: one for the product, one for the palette, one for the lighting, one for the typographic treatment, and you have run out before you have supplied a character.
Nano Banana Pro takes the highest reference count of any model on the platform, which is why it is the one behind brand-consistent sets where a look has to hold across a dozen outputs. If you are working from a single reference, this row is noise and you should ignore it.
Nano Banana Pro is the dearer of the two, and the difference compounds across a session rather than a single image. The honest way to use that gap is not to pick the cheaper model, it is to explore on a cheap model and finish on the right one. Nano Banana, the Flash tier, costs half what Pro does and shares its lineage, so blocking out a composition there and re-running the winner on Pro is the cheapest route to a good final image.
Credits only leave your balance on a successful generation. A refusal or a failure refunds automatically, so running the same prompt on both models to see the difference costs you two images and nothing else. The Model Comparison tool exists for exactly that and runs one prompt through up to four models at once.
Neither is better across the board, and the choice is usually decided by one feature of your brief. Nano Banana Pro is the stronger choice when the image has to contain legible text, when you need maximum fine detail, or when you are blending more than four reference images. GPT Image 2 is the stronger choice when the prompt is a set of literal requirements about counts, placement and framing, or when the output has to look commercially finished without rework.
Nano Banana Pro. It is the most reliable model on the platform for words rendered as part of the image rather than pasted on top, which is why it is the one to point poster, cover and infographic work at. GPT Image 2 handles a single short string acceptably, but the gap widens as soon as the image needs a headline and a subtitle together. Neither model sets long paragraphs reliably, so body copy should be composited rather than generated.
GPT Image 2 costs fewer credits per image than Nano Banana Pro. Both are priced per image with no subscription, and the exact credit figures are in the table on this page, computed from the live pricing registry. If cost is the deciding factor, the better move is usually to explore on Nano Banana, the cheaper Flash tier, and only spend Pro credits on the final render.
Yes. Both models, and every other image and video model on the platform, run from one account and one credit balance with no per-provider API keys to manage. The Model Comparison tool runs a single prompt through up to four models at once so you can judge them side by side on your own brief rather than on someone else's sample images.
No. Nano Banana Pro is reached through Google's API and GPT Image 2 through OpenAI's, but both are billed in AI Credits from your Prompt Reverse balance. There is nothing to sign up for on either provider's side.
Credits are refunded automatically. That matters most with GPT Image 2, which runs the strictest content filtering here and refuses prompts involving real people, recognisable brands or edgy themes more often than the other models. A refusal costs you time rather than balance.
Run one prompt through both models, see every comparison in one place, or browse all 12 models with specs and prices. Pay as you go, no subscription, credit packs never expire.