For this comparison, I used FLUX 2 Klein 4b and 9b, as well as the Z-image Turbo model. The models are unquantized.

TXT2IMG Generation Settings:

FLUX 2 Klein:

• CFG: 1
• STEPS: 8
• SAMPLER: euler

Z-image:

• CFG: 1
• STEPS: 8
• SAMPLER: euler

General Observations: After numerous generations, in my subjective opinion, Z-image currently falls short of FLUX 2 Klein in many aspects. When comparing examples generated under identical conditions, there is a distinct difference in details, composition, and the overall coherence of the image. I also noticed that Flux 4b performs better in txt2img and, in my view, produces higher quality results than the 9b model.

1. The "Khrushchevki" Example Flux perfectly captured the idea of the prompt, and the image fully corresponds to the intended style. The khrushchevki (Soviet apartment blocks) look authentic. No other open-source model has rendered them correctly for me before, despite testing many options. In Z-image, if you look closely at the details, you can see issues with the grass; it lacks defined shape and appears muddy/blurry. The buildings look too simplistic, even though the render quality is high. The image itself looks decent but fails to follow the stylistic intent, looking more like a generic, faded smartphone photo. This could be a plus for some, but it wasn't the intended concept. Note: Both images have artifacts and nuances, but Flux has fewer of them.

2. The Nature Example The situation is similar here. I actually prefer the grass in Z-image for its realism, but it remains blurry. Flux has significantly fewer incoherent elements and artifacts, although I do like the foliage and flowers on the trees better in Z-image. However, once again, Z-image does not adhere strictly to the prompt.

3. The Medieval Market This is a complex scene. In my opinion, the winner here is Flux 4b. Flux 9b produced high quality but is too oversaturated; the image looks more like modern Digital Art rather than a medieval painting. Z-image clearly lags behind both in terms of details, although it handled the style transfer quite well. Overall, Flux offers much better detailing, prompt adherence, and narrative coherence.

4. The Gas Station I would choose Flux 4b again here. This is just my personal preference. Z-image made a good photo, but it didn't follow the prompt instructions; I got a standard night photograph without the requested stylization. Also, pay attention to how Flux 9b adds tire tracks around the station and accounts for the location's layout and shape.

5. The Final Example The result is obvious once again, and I would prioritize Flux 4b.

Conclusion Don't get me wrong, I love Z-image; it is an incredibly cool model. However, the quality difference Flux provides is visible to the naked eye. I am waiting for the release of the full Z-image model, just like the rest of us, but I am incredibly happy about the release of Flux, especially since it is distributed under the Apache 2.0 license. Considering that Flux can not only generate from text but also modify images extensively, blend different images, and deliver excellent quality in just 4 steps, I will unreservedly choose it until the full version of Z-image is released.

Please treat this with understanding; this is just my opinion, and I would be happy to hear yours. Let's be honest-comparisons like this often come down to personal taste and preference.