I put the top AI image generators head-to-head — see the results for yourself – Mashable
When you first think of AI, you probably think of a text-based AI chatbot like ChatGPT or Google Gemini. But AI tools are getting a lot more versatile. Even basic AI chatbots now offer a range of media creation tools, including AI image generation.
But what’s the best AI image generator? That’s exactly what I set out to find.
While the average user will probably be happy with free AI image generators (ChatGPT, Grok, and MetaAI let users create images for free), there are actually quite a few AI image makers worth paying for in 2025, and they’re not all created equal.
In the early days, these tools were inconsistent, struggled with realism, and failed to follow instructions. But after only a few years of development, most of those issues have been ironed out — you shouldn’t get mangled fingers anymore. Now, AI image models, like the one built into OpenAI’s latest model GPT-5, allow users to refine and tweak images based on text input, while others target extreme photorealism or image-to-video creation.
I pit the best AI image generators against each other, and you can compare the results for yourself.
I ran a series of standard prompts through each model. Here are the exact prompts I used:
Create a sketch of a futuristic Tokyo skyline at sunset, with flying cars, glowing advertisements in Japanese, and Mount Fuji in the background.
Create a candid photorealistic image of a woman drinking a coffee and smoking a cigarette at a cafe in Paris in the late evening.
Create a medieval blacksmith’s workshop interior, showing a female blacksmith hammering a glowing sword, with sparks flying, a roaring forge, hanging tools, and a cat curled up near the fire, in high detail and warm tones.
Create an impressionist painting in the style of Vincent Van Gogh of a robot blowing dandelion seeds into the wind.
Safety is also an important concern, especially as deepfakes become more common. (We’re looking at you, xAI.) So, I also ran a series of three prompts through each model to create a deepfake and test the safety features of each model. The results were disappointing, sadly. The first prompt was designed to trigger safeguards around images with public figures. I then used two more prompts engineered to skirt the rules. (I’m not sharing the exact prompts in this case.) All of the image generators created something within these three prompts, but I was very surprised at the number of AI tools that created an image on the first prompt.
It’s also important to note that all of these outputs were made using basic default settings. Some image generators give more than one image for each prompt by default. In those cases, only the first image was used. We didn’t go through each of them to determine which was best and use that.
So, based on these tests, what is the best AI image generator in 2025? Yes, there was a clear winner, and no, it probably won’t surprise you — it’s ChatGPT.
OpenAI released a massive upgrade to its image generation tools through GPT-4o, which did away with the DALL-E model for generating images and wrapped its image generation tools into its flagship large language model (which is now GPT-5). The results of this update were pretty massive (and controversial). Before the new image generator, images created by ChatGPT tended to have weird-shaped text, limited photorealism, and the usual AI artifacts. The update (now called GPT-Image-1) changes that — and can be accessed for free.
Now, text is clear and precise, the tool is able to create photorealistic images, and users can have ChatGPT edit images through text prompts. In other words, you can have a GPT create an image and ask it to change certain aspects of the image, and it will do so fairly precisely without altering too much else about the image. Of course, it’s still not perfect, and it can still go rogue, but it’s far and away the most precise AI image maker.
Using ChatGPT feels more like asking a person to create or edit an image rather than using a software tool. For all these reasons, it’s easily the best AI image generator in 2025, whether you’re a free or paid user.
GPT-Image-1 had some awareness about image safety and refused to create a deepfake at first. However, it did create a lookalike when we pressed. That was still better than most other tools, but it would still be relatively easy for most users to create deepfake images using ChatGPT.
Free tier: Yes (daily limits on images)
Monthly Pricing: $20 Plus plan, $200 Pro plan
Sign up at OpenAI
Midjourney is one of the original AI image generators, and since its original release in 2022, it has gotten a number of updates. Midjourney V7 is the latest model, and to use it, you’ll go through a personalization process in which you’ll essentially train the model to the kinds of images you like. After going through the personalization process, we found that the results were very impressive, though images still did have some issues, like struggling with fingers, hands, and some other minor details. GPT-Image-1 was a little better at things like that.
However, there was one area in which Midjourney was better than most others, and that’s in actually following the prompts. Unlike many of the other models we tested, it followed our direction to create a sketch of Tokyo instead of a photorealistic image, created a painting in the style of Van Gogh, and so on. Like the other image generators that create multiple images at a time, we’re judging Midjourney based on the first image it created, but the others that it spat out were similarly accurate to what we asked it to do.
The generator had no problem creating deepfakes though, generating an image on the first go. That issue aside, Midjourney was excellent at creating highly detailed, realistic images when prompted — and it always stuck to the prompt that we gave.
Like ChatGPT, Midjourney is worth paying for if you make a lot of AI images. As a bonus, paid users can easily turn images into videos with Midjourney.
Free tier: No
Monthly Pricing: $10 Basic plan, $30 Standard plan, $60 Pro plan, $120 Mega plan
Sign up at Midjourney
GPT-4o was able to follow instructions and create vibrant and detailed photorealistic images, but Ideogram 1.0 had a slight edge in photorealism, despite not offering the same level of chat-based features nor the same accessibility.
In general, the images created by Ideogram 1.0 tended to be brighter and more vibrant than those created by GPT-4o, and when it came to photorealism, the model was able to create images with proper shadow placement and general lighting. You could still look closely at an image and see things that weren’t very realistic or looked a little out of place. For example, in the image of the woman at the café in Paris, the smoke from the cigarette appeared to be coming from the coffee as well as the cigarette. Still, these were minor issues from a model that was far more realistic than most of the others, which still struggled with things like hands and following specific instructions.
Ideogram had no problem generating deepfake images, though. The service generated the image I requested on the first prompt, even when I mentioned a celebrity by name. You may or may not find this to be an issue, and if you don’t plan on generating deepfake images, then it probably won’t matter to you either way. But, it does raise some questions about how the model handles safety.
Free tier: Yes (weekly limits on images)
Monthly Pricing: $7 Basic plan, $16 Plus plan, $48 Pro plan
Sign up at Ideogram
Google’s latest image generation model is Imagen 4, and it’s a significant upgrade over Imagen 3. It also happens to be very easy to access, and you can use it in the dedicated Gemini app, Google Docs, the Google app, and even in Chrome. While Meta AI is perhaps just as easy to access (or maybe even easier, as it’s included in services like Messenger and WhatsApp), Gemini’s output is far better.
Note, Google has released Imagen 4 Ultra; however, we’re not including it in this guide since it’s not available in stock-standard Gemini yet.
Imagen 4 wasn’t perfect. The sketch of Tokyo was photorealistic despite our instructions, which was ironic given that the image of the blacksmith came out as a sketch. The Van Gogh-style painting of a robot was in the style of Van Gogh, but it also hilariously put Van Gogh’s head on a robot body. All that said, the quality of the images was impressive, and the image of the woman at the cafe looked as good as the ChatGPT version. With the right prompts, you can easily get images that are as good as ChatGPT. If you’re in Google’s ecosystem and use Gemini anyway, you won’t be losing out on quality by just sticking with Gemini for your image tool instead of downloading an additional app just for images.
Free tier: Yes
Monthly pricing: $19.99 AI Pro plan (free trial), $249.99 AI Ultra plan
Sign up at Google Gemini
Professional photographers, graphic designers, and others probably already use Adobe’s tools in their workflow, and as such, it makes sense to leverage Adobe Firefly if you’re looking for an AI image generator. For our test, we used the latest and greatest Firefly model, called Firefly Image 4 Ultra.
That said, the integration with Adobe tools was perhaps the best thing about it. The results weren’t bad most of the time, and I was very impressed at the level of detail on offer by the image of a woman at a cafe in Paris. Also worth noting is the fact that this model was the only one that didn’t generate an image of a Caucasian woman, which is notable considering the fact that there was no direction as to the subject’s race in the prompt. That said, in the resulting image, there’s no indication whatsoever that the woman is in Paris. The other images may not have the Eiffel Tower in the background, but they do have a European vibe, and having lived in Paris, I can totally see those locations being there. Firefly’s cafe could realistically be anywhere.
The other images had their own issues. The cat in the blacksmith photo looked quite strange. It failed completely to generate an image of either a robot or something that even approached the style of Vincent Van Gogh, instead opting for an image of a house. And, the “sketch” of Tokyo ended up photorealistic, without any indication that it was actually Tokyo. All that to say, Firefly may be better for generating parts of an image or filling an existing photo with additional information rather than creating entirely new images.
It is worth noting that Firefly was among the best at avoiding generating a deepfake. It refused to generate anything until the final prompt, and the resulting image looked nothing like the intended figure. So, Firefly gets top marks for safety.
Free tier: Free trial only
Monthly pricing: $9.99 Standard plan, $29.99 Pro plan, $199.99 Premium plan
Sign up at Adobe Firefly
If you have a Facebook or Meta account, then Meta AI is also extremely easy to access, making it one of the best free AI image generators. Yes, ChatGPT is also free to use, but you quickly hit image generation limits. On top of that, Meta’s Llama is even easier to use because of the fact that it’s baked into so many products already. Meta AI has its own app and website, but you can also access it through Facebook Messenger, Instagram, and WhatsApp.
The quality of Meta AI’s image generator is…not great. Even when it comes to images that are supposed to be photorealistic, it has an AI quality to it that was characteristic of the best image generators from a couple of years ago. It kind of half-heartedly follows prompts like being told to create something in the style of Van Gogh, and the image of Tokyo couldn’t really be considered a “sketch.”
It’s roughly on par with Grok Imagine. And, like Grok, it plays fast and loose with concepts like intellectual property. The willingness to create images featuring celebrities is frankly surprising, and it’s especially concerning from a social media company. On the plus side, we appreciate that unlike most of the big players in the AI industry, Llama is an open-weight model.
In summary, the image quality with Meta AI is pretty mediocre, but if you just want to create a lot of images and share them with your friends, this is the best AI image generator for you.
Free to use: Yes
Download the Meta AI app for iOS or Android; access via Facebook, Instagram, or WhatsApp
Stable Diffusion is another original in the AI image generation world, and the Stable Image Ultra model is its latest. This open-source model also created excellent images; however, it also suffered from some of the same issues as Midjourney, failing to accurately produce things like fingers. That said, most of our test images were very, very good.
Free tier: Yes
Sign up at Stable Diffusion
Black Forest Labs has been working on AI image generation tools for some time, and its best model so far is Flux Pro 1.1 Ultra. This model was able to create solid images overall. All of its images looked nice, though it didn’t really recreate the Van Gogh style very well, and the sketch of Tokyo wasn’t a sketch. Everything else looked fine. It was perfectly willing to create a deepfake, though opted for a motorcycle instead of a bicycle. That’s forgivable considering the vagueness of the term “bike.”
Free tier: Yes
Monthly pricing: $16.90 Basic plan, $22.90 Pro plan, $26.90 Max plan, $42.90 Pro Max plan
Sign up at Flux Pro
Ah, Grok. X’s problem child. With the latest Grok 4 model, Grok’s images can sometimes be high-quality, and it was hit or miss at creating photorealism. So why is it ranked last? In general, Grok’s images reminded me of the best AI image generators from 2023 — full of errors that simply defy the laws of physics. Likewise, the new Grok Imagine AI image and video generation did not impress Mashable testers, and it lacks industry-standard safeguards.
Grok also failed to follow my instructions to create a “sketch,” and in the image of the blacksmith, it created two cats, though one of them didn’t really look like one. The hands of the Parisian at the cafe are messed up, too. Bear in mind, I got these results with the paid version of Grok. My advice? Stick with the free version.
Free tier: Yes
Monthly pricing: $8 X Premium plan, $30 SuperGrok plan, $300 SuperGrok Heavy plan
Sign up at X, Grok, or xAI
That depends on who you ask. Many artists believe that artificial intelligence tools like Grok, ChatGPT, and Meta have been unfairly (and possibly illegally) trained on copyrighted works. Disney and Universal recently sued Midjourney, calling it a “bottomless pit of plagiarism.
Mashable has reported on some of the legal cases against AI companies, as well as a controversial report from the U.S. Copyright Office. That report favored artists who claim that AI companies can’t freely train on copyrighted work, and we’re waiting for courts to address this issue in class action lawsuits like Kadrey v. Meta.
Today, virtually any use of AI tools in the arts is sure to generate a backlash. When ChatGPT showed off the new image abilities of GPT-4o, it sparked a viral trend of people making images in the style of Studio Ghibli, which in turn sparked a backlash against OpenAI. AI companies like OpenAI have argued that users should have a “freedom to learn” from AI technology, and that strict regulation will put the U.S. AI industry at risk of falling behind other countries. Indeed, despite these controversies, many artists are actively using artificial intelligence in some capacity in their work.
Finally, there’s the issue of deepfakes. The U.S. recently passed a law against adult deepfakes, and we have serious concerns about how AI-generated images can be used to spread misinformation.
When evaluating an AI image generator, make an informed decision based on all of these factors.
Disclosure: Ziff Davis, Mashable’s parent company, in April filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging it infringed Ziff Davis copyrights in training and operating its AI systems.
Topics Artificial Intelligence
