wan3.0-video real-task evaluations

Every report keeps its original task, method, finding, limitation, evaluator identity and verification date. A community report is evidence about that run, not a universal score.

• WAN 3.0 and MiniMax H3 compared clip by clip on scenes from an AI horror short

  By Rax Films (@Rax_films). AI short-film channel that makes survival-horror, frontier-thriller and sci-fi fan films with AI video models Published 2026-09-22; retrieved 2026-09-25; verified 2026-09-25.

  Task

  Scenes from the author's own AI survival-horror short, Wrong Turn: Blood Money: fast chases and action, and slower acting and dialogue scenes

  Method

  A side-by-side, clip-by-clip comparison of both models' generations for the same scenes at 16:9, shown without voiceover; the verdict is the author's own written breakdown in the video description.

  Finding

  WAN 3.0 was a clear step ahead on high-speed action, kinetic physics, chase choreography and cinematic camera movement, handling rapid motion with fewer artifacts; MiniMax H3 won the acting and dialogue scenes on micro-expressions, emotional delivery, lip sync and keeping voice identity and accents, an area where WAN 3.0 still struggles.

  Limitation

  One creator's qualitative verdict on scenes from their own film: there are no scores, and the description does not say how many generations were made, which platform or settings were used, or which Wan 3.0 tier was tested.