I wasn't going to write this.
Everyone's already screaming about GPT Image 1.5 being "#1 on LMArena" and "4x faster than before." But after two weeks of actual production use - generating 500+ images for client work, testing edge cases until 2am, and comparing it side-by-side with Google's Nano Banana Pro - I have thoughts.
Some will piss off the fanboys. Let's go.
What Actually Changed in GPT Image 1.5
OpenAI dropped GPT Image 1.5 on December 16, 2025. Here's what matters:
Speed: Actually 4x faster
- GPT Image 1: 8-12 seconds per image
- GPT Image 1.5: 3-5 seconds (simple prompts under 2 seconds)
- My test: Generated 100 product mockups in 8 minutes. Previously took 20 minutes.
This isn't marketing bullshit. I timed it.
Instruction Following: This is the killer feature
I gave it this prompt: "Change the shirt color to navy blue. Keep everything else identical - same face, same pose, same lighting, same background."
GPT Image 1 changed the shirt but also altered the face slightly and adjusted the lighting.
GPT Image 1.5 changed ONLY the shirt. Face: pixel-identical. Pose: unchanged. Lighting: preserved.
For product photography and brand work, this is the difference between "kinda useful" and "replaced my Photoshop workflow."
Text Rendering: Better, not perfect
Tested with: infographics, UI mockups, menu designs, marketing posters.
Results:
- Dense paragraphs: 80% success rate (down from 40% in GPT Image 1)
- Small fonts: readable in most cases
- Complex layouts: occasional character swaps
Still not perfect. If your entire business is generating text-heavy images, proof every output. But for most use cases? Finally usable.
Cost: 20% cheaper
GPT Image 1: ~$0.08 per image
GPT Image 1.5: ~$0.064 per image
For high-volume users, this adds up. We generated 2,000 images last month. Saved $32. Not life-changing, but I'll take it.
The Real Test: GPT Image 1.5 vs Nano Banana Pro
Google launched Nano Banana Pro (their Gemini 3 Pro Image model) two months before GPT Image 1.5. Everyone said it would crush OpenAI.
I tested both for two weeks on identical prompts. Here's the truth.
When GPT Image 1.5 Wins
Precision editing - Not close. GPT Image 1.5 destroys Nano Banana Pro here. Tell it to "change the background to a coffee shop, keep the person identical" and it does exactly that. Nano Banana Pro reinterprets the person slightly every time.
Speed - GPT Image 1.5 averaged 4 seconds. Nano Banana Pro averaged 6-8 seconds. Doesn't sound like much until you're iterating 50 times on a client project.
API reliability - OpenAI's API responded consistently. Google's had occasional timeouts during peak hours. Could be my region (US East), could be their scaling. Either way, GPT Image 1.5 felt more stable.
English prompts - Both models understand English well, but GPT Image 1.5 seemed slightly better at complex multi-clause prompts. "A woman in her 30s with curly red hair, wearing a navy blue blazer, sitting in a modern coffee shop with large windows, shot on a 50mm lens with shallow depth of field" - GPT Image 1.5 nailed it first try. Nano Banana Pro took 3 attempts.
When Nano Banana Pro Wins
Artistic styles - Nano Banana Pro is better at abstract art, painterly styles, and experimental visuals. If you're creating art for art's sake, Nano Banana Pro edges ahead.
Non-English languages - Google's multilingual capabilities are superior. Tested in Spanish, Japanese, and Hindi - Nano Banana Pro understood context better.
Integration with Google ecosystem - If you're already using Google Workspace, Vertex AI, etc., Nano Banana Pro fits naturally.
The Verdict
For commercial/business use: GPT Image 1.5.
For artistic exploration: Nano Banana Pro.
For multilingual teams: Nano Banana Pro.
For speed + precision: GPT Image 1.5.
LMArena scores:
- GPT Image 1.5: 1264 (generation), 1409 (editing)
- Nano Banana Pro: 1235 (generation), 1380 (editing)
The numbers reflect reality. GPT Image 1.5 is measurably better at instruction following and editing. Nano Banana Pro is slightly more creative.
What About Midjourney and DALL-E 3?
Midjourney v6 - Still the king for high-end artistic work. If you need gallery-quality art or have time to learn Discord commands and prompt engineering, Midjourney produces the most "wow factor" images.
But:
- No editing features
- Steeper learning curve
- Slower generation (15-30 seconds)
- $30/month vs GPT Image 1.5's $9.9/month
For most business use cases, GPT Image 1.5's speed and editing beats Midjourney's artistic edge.
DALL-E 3 - This is the awkward one. GPT Image 1.5 is literally the replacement. OpenAI will likely phase out DALL-E 3.
If you're using DALL-E 3 today, migrate to GPT Image 1.5. It's faster, cheaper, and better at everything.
Real-World Use Cases: What Actually Works
I tested GPT Image 1.5 for:
Product Photography (9/10)
Generated 50+ product mockups for an e-commerce client. Changed backgrounds, lighting, angles without reshooting.
What worked: Precise control over individual elements. "Change background to white, keep shadows" actually kept the shadows.
What didn't: Very complex products with intricate details sometimes lost fine features. Jewelry was hit-or-miss.
Social Media Content (10/10)
Created 30 days of Instagram content in 3 hours. Quote graphics, lifestyle images, branded templates.
What worked: Text rendering (finally). Consistent style across posts. Fast iteration.
What didn't: Nothing major. This is GPT Image 1.5's sweet spot.
UI/UX Mockups (8/10)
Designed app interface concepts for a client pitch.
What worked: Layout understanding. Text placement. Multiple screen states.
What didn't: Very small UI text (under 12pt) sometimes blurred. Fine details like icons weren't pixel-perfect.
Marketing Materials (9/10)
Posters, flyers, event banners, ad creatives.
What worked: High resolution. Text legibility. Brand logo preservation (huge for agencies).
What didn't: Occasional color shifts in brand colors. Always check against brand guidelines.
Character Consistency (7/10)
Tried creating a character for a children's book - same character, different scenes.
What worked: Face preservation across scenes when using style reference feature.
What didn't: Small inconsistencies in clothing details and accessories. Not perfect for professional animation/comics yet.
The Stuff Nobody Tells You
1. It's fast... when it's not busy
Prime time (9am-5pm PST): occasionally waited 30 seconds during "high demand."
Off-peak: consistently 3-5 seconds.
2. The "precise editing" has limits
Works perfectly on: backgrounds, colors, simple objects.
Gets wonky on: faces (sometimes), complex textures, fine details.
Always generate a few variations. One will be right.
3. Text rendering is "good enough"
80% of the time, text is perfect.
15% of the time, minor issues (kerning, slight character swaps).
5% of the time, unusable garbage.
For mission-critical text (like brand slogans), double-check every output.
4. Commercial rights are clear (finally)
You own what you generate. Use it for client work, products, ads, resale. No attribution required.
This matters. Some competitors have murky licensing.
5. API documentation is actually good
OpenAI's API docs are clear, with working code examples. Integrated GPT Image 1.5 into a client's product customization flow in 4 hours.
Compare that to some competitors where you're deciphering Reddit threads to figure out authentication.
Should You Use GPT Image 1.5?
Yes, if:
- You need fast iteration for content creation
- Precise editing matters (product photos, brand work)
- You want beginner-friendly with no learning curve
- Budget-conscious ($9.9/month beats most alternatives)
- API integration for automated workflows
- You value stability and clear licensing
Stick with competitors if:
- You need bleeding-edge artistic quality (Midjourney)
- Already invested in Google ecosystem (Nano Banana Pro)
- Free/self-hosted is mandatory (Stable Diffusion)
- Multilingual prompts are critical (Nano Banana Pro)
The Bottom Line
GPT Image 1.5 isn't perfect. Text rendering still fails occasionally. Complex scenes take 2 minutes, not seconds. Peak-hour delays happen.
But for 90% of business and content creation use cases, it's the best option right now.
The precise editing alone justifies switching. Being able to say "change X, keep Y identical" and actually having it work - that's not incremental improvement. That's a workflow transformation.
Is it worth $9.9/month? If you generate more than 10 images per month, yes.
Will it replace human designers? No. But it will change what designers spend time on.
The designers who learn to use GPT Image 1.5 effectively will outcompete those who don't. That's not hype. That's already happening.
Tested on: GPT Image 1.5 via OpenAI API and web interface, December 2025.
Comparison models: Google Nano Banana Pro, Midjourney v6, DALL-E 3.
Use case: Production client work, 500+ images generated.
Want to try GPT Image 1.5 yourself? Start with 2 free images - no credit card required.
