Veo 3.1 and Kling 3.0 both publish real numbers, which already separates this comparison from most. It keeps to one rule: every figure below is printed on the vendor’s own page.
The two pages are also good at different things. Google tells you what a clip can contain. Kuaishou tells you what a clip costs.
The short answer: eight seconds against three to fifteen
Veo 3.1 is documented at eight seconds per clip, in 1080p and 4K, with audio generated alongside the picture. Kling 3.0 is documented at three to fifteen seconds per generation, in 1080p and 720p, with native audio as one of two billing modes.
If your brief is a ten-second scene with a cut in it, that single row decides more than any quality claim on either side.
What each vendor’s own pages confirm, side by side
| Published item | Veo 3.1 · Google | Kling 3.0 · Kuaishou |
|---|---|---|
| Where published | DeepMind’s Veo model page | Kuaishou’s VIDEO 3.0 guide |
| Clip length | “Veo videos are 8 seconds long.” | “ranging from 3 to 15 seconds” |
| Resolution | 1080p and 4K | 1080p and 720p |
| Native audio | Generated with the picture | A billing mode of its own |
| Multi-shot | Not published as a mode | Multi-Shot, Custom Multi-Shot |
| Character reference | Reference images, first-and-last frame | Start frame plus element reference |
| Dialogue languages | No language list published | Chinese, English, Japanese, Korean, Spanish |
| Published price | Not on the model page | A credit rate per second |
Read the duration and dialogue rows carefully, because they are where a vendor’s own page contradicts what circulates online.
Clip length: the row that changes the workflow
Kuaishou’s guide is direct. “The new model generates up to 15 seconds of continuous video, with a flexible duration ranging from 3 to 15 seconds.” A five-second idea does not pay for ten seconds of generation.
Google prints one number, “Veo videos are 8 seconds long”, and documents what to do about it: extend the scene, continuing from the last second of the previous clip while keeping visuals and audio consistent.
Both are legitimate designs, and they produce different edit timelines. One puts the storyboard inside the prompt window, the other puts it in your editing software.
Credits: Kuaishou prints a per-second rate, Google does not
Kuaishou publishes a per-second credit price for each mode and resolution, and works three examples of its own. Google’s model page publishes no price at all, and the consumer side bills in Flow Credits whose conversion into generations has never been published.
Reading Kling’s credit table
| Kling 3.0 mode | 1080p | 720p |
|---|---|---|
| Video · native audio | 12 Credits/s | 9 Credits/s |
| Video · no native audio | 8 Credits/s | 6 Credits/s |
| Voice tone control | 2 Credits/s | 2 Credits/s |
The guide states that fees are charged per second and offers its own arithmetic: five seconds of native audio at 1080p is 60 Credits, five seconds without native audio at 720p is 30 Credits, and five seconds of native audio with voice tone control at 1080p is 70 Credits.
That is a published rate you can multiply. Nothing comparable exists on Google’s side, which is why the price and free access guide refuses to convert a Veo credit balance into a clip count, and the API and Vertex AI pricing guide has to work in per-unit rates instead.
Resolution and dialogue: what each page prints
Google prints 1080p and 4K, framing 4K as the option that captures more texture for high-end work. Kuaishou’s guide lists 1080p and 720p for VIDEO 3.0, and notes that the native audio mode also allows a voice tone control feature.
Dialogue is where Kling’s page is unusually specific: it names five languages, adds dialects and accents, and claims multi-character coreference for three or more speakers. Google documents dialogue generation and prints a candid limitation instead — natural and consistent spoken audio, especially for shorter segments, remains an area of active development. It publishes no language list, so any list you read for Veo 3.1 is somebody’s test, not a specification.
Worked example: the same ten-second brief on both models
A ten-second brief with a cut in it lands exactly on the difference between the two published clip lengths.
The prompt
“A ten-second scene in two shots. Shot one: a night market stall, steam rising off a griddle, the vendor sliding a paper tray across the counter. Shot two: a close-up of the customer’s hands taking the tray, then looking up and saying: ‘Thank you, that was quick.’ Handheld camera, warm stall light, crowd noise behind.”
Parameters: ten seconds, 1080p, 16:9, native audio, one scene.
What each platform returns
On Kling 3.0, ten seconds fits the published window, so the whole scene can be one generation with Multi-Shot enabled to plan the cut. The cost is arithmetic on a published rate rather than a guess: ten seconds of native audio at 1080p is 120 Credits, or 90 at 720p.
On Veo 3.1, eight seconds is the published length, so the same brief is two steps: generate the first clip, then extend it from its last second while keeping the audio consistent. What you cannot do is price it the same way, because Google publishes no credits-per-generation figure. What this scene costs on Veo 3.1 is a number the vendor has not published.
We have not run the two side by side, and this page is not a quality verdict. The prompt guide covers the elements Google documents, and the getting-started walkthrough takes a first clip end to end.
Where the third-party numbers come from
Search this comparison and you will meet two kinds of page. The first hosts both models and quotes its own credit prices, which are that platform’s rates, not Kuaishou’s; several also publish score tables out of ten that no vendor has ever released. The second quotes a Kling clip length of five to ten seconds, carried over from an earlier model generation, while the current Kuaishou guide says three to fifteen.
Google’s page supplies the other correction. It prints one clip length, eight seconds, and several comparisons list a menu of them.
What neither vendor has published
Google’s Veo 3.1 model page publishes no price, no subscription tier, no credit balance, no free allowance and no Flow Credits conversion. It says nothing about a watermark policy or a dialogue language list either.
Kuaishou’s model guide publishes credit rates but no watermark policy, and its pricing page renders plan amounts in the browser rather than in the served text, so no subscription figure appears here.
Frequently asked questions
Which model makes longer clips? Kling 3.0, on the published figures: three to fifteen seconds against a fixed eight.
Does Kling generate audio? Yes. Native audio is one of its two billing modes and costs more per second than the silent mode.
Which is cheaper? Not directly comparable. Kuaishou publishes a per-second credit rate; Google publishes no conversion from Flow Credits to generations.
Does Veo 3.1 do multi-shot? Google documents camera controls, motion controls and scene extension, not a multi-shot mode. Kuaishou publishes Multi-Shot and Custom Multi-Shot by name.
What resolution can each output? Google prints 1080p and 4K. Kuaishou’s guide prints 1080p and 720p.
Where do I start with Veo 3.1? The topic hub collects the tutorial, the prompt guide and the developer documentation.
Two vendors, two published rate cards, one honest gap. Multiply Kling’s rate for your own brief, and ask Google for the conversion figure before promising anyone a number for Veo 3.1.