Kling 4 vs Seedance 2.5: Which AI Breaks First? (7 ArchViz Tests)

Become members today! (You can View Video first!! & download scene file first!)成為這個頻道的會員並獲得獎勵：    / leochou   Same prompt, same reference image, first take only. I put Kling 4.0 Omni and Seedance 2.5 through 7 architectural visualization rounds to see which one keeps furniture, light, materials and reflections consistent. Each round tests one variable. Every clip is 10 seconds, 16:9, with no re-rolls or cherry-picking. Each round is scored on 5 dimensions (prompt adherence, spatial consistency, material & light, camera continuity, detail quality) for 25 points, 175 total. Provisional result: Kling 4.0 Omni 147 / Seedance 2.5 140 (84.0 vs 80.0 out of 100), rounds won 5 to 2. Scoring rule: one defect is counted in one dimension only. These are provisional scores against my test rubric, not yet blind-judged. Chapters 0:00 Intro and rules 0:06 A1 Exterior Consistency 0:49 A2 Interior Push-in 1:32 A3 One Take, Three Rooms 2:15 A4 Day to Night 2:58 A5 Material Close-up 3:41 A6 Glass & Reflections 4:24 A7 Multi-angle Continuity 5:07 Final scoreboard 5:15 Verdict What I found • Kling 4.0 Omni follows camera moves more literally and nailed the Chinese sign reflection in the rain, but objects drift (a fence, Taipei 101, extra menu boards). • Seedance 2.5 holds layouts tighter and renders crisper materials, but under-moves the camera and adds extra objects. • Neither is a CAD renderer: this measures visual consistency, not dimensional accuracy. Which one would you put in a client presentation? Tell me in the comments. All video clips are AI-generated. Background music is original. #Kling #Seedance #AIVideo #ArchViz #ArchitecturalVisualization #AIvideoComparison