Skip to main content
Kaino.dev
Discover
Evals
News
Academics
Kaino.dev

Discover, evaluate, and compare AI tools, models, and agents.

Explore

  • Discover
  • Evaluations
  • News
  • Academics

Community

  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Instagram
Privacy PolicyTerms of Service

© 2026 Kaino.dev. All rights reserved.

Version 1.1.0
Runway Gen-4.5 · Evaluations · Kaino
R
model evaluation

Runway Gen-4.5

Runway

Runway video generation model available in the Runway API as `gen4.5`, supporting text or image inputs for cinematic AI video generation.

modelsource:runwayml.comvideo-generationtext-to-videoimage-to-videorunway-api
67.2KAINO SCORENot recommended
Evaluated Sep 15, 202610 reviews
Website Docs GitHub

Scorecard

PricingMultimodalCostDev expTechnicalSpeedCodingReasoningRiskAdoption
  • Technical capability91
  • Pricing clarity83
  • Multimodal & I/O82
  • Developer experience80
  • Risk & evidence76
  • Speed & availability70
  • Adoption signal67
  • Cost effectiveness61
  • Reasoning & knowledge42
  • Coding & agentic20

Kainotomic evaluation

Artificial Analysis identifies Gen-4.5 as its 2025 year-end video-model leader, about 200 Elo ahead of prior leader Sora, supporting a high technical-capability score for its intended medium. Official Runway materials document API model ID `gen4.5` and both text-to-video and image-to-video generation. This is strong modality-specific evidence, not evidence of broad language intelligence, coding, or agent operation. Runway publishes an operational unit price of 12 credits per generated second, with clearly stated surcharges for professional formats and HDR/10-bit. That makes pricing more transparent than Pegasus 1.5’s low-clariy anchor, although the supplied evidence does not convert credits to currency or establish output-quality-per-dollar. API documentation supports a solid developer-experience score; no supplied latency, uptime, throughput, or regional-availability measurements justify a higher availability score. Gen-4.5 exceeds generalist anchors such as GPT-5.6 Terra on video-specific technical evidence, but remains materially below Claude Opus 4.8, GPT-5.5, and Kimi K2.5 for coding and reasoning because no applicable results exist. It is similar to Gemini 3.5 Flash in input modality breadth but narrower: its documented output is video. Public preference is mixed: Text-to-Video Arena records 43,610 votes but ranks it 27th (1224±9), tempering the year-end Artificial Analysis result. Evidence quality is good for video capability and pricing, but sparse outside that scope.

Strengths

  • Independent Artificial Analysis year-end evidence names it the 2025 video-model leader.
  • Official API support for text-to-video and image-to-video workflows.
  • Published per-second credit pricing and output-format surcharges.

Caveats

  • No direct coding, software-agent, or general-reasoning benchmark result is supplied.
  • Credit pricing lacks a supplied currency conversion, limiting cost comparison.
  • Arena preference evidence is substantial in vote count but places the model 27th in its snapshot.