WritingmateWritingmate
Model Comparison

FLUX.2 Klein 4B vs Recraft V4 Styles VectorWhich Is Better in 2026?

Black Forest Labs: FLUX.2 Klein 4B logoBlack Forest Labs•
Recraft

FLUX.2 Klein 4B vs Recraft V4 Styles Vector: which should you choose in 2026?

FLUX.2 Klein 4B (by Black Forest Labs) and Recraft V4 Styles Vector (by Recraft) are compared below. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price, and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

There are not enough shared, protocol-compatible benchmark results to declare a performance leader.

Choose FLUX.2 Klein 4B if…

  • • your own prompt tests favor its output; shared comparable evidence does not identify a unique advantage

Choose Recraft V4 Styles Vector if…

  • • your own prompt tests favor its output; shared comparable evidence does not identify a unique advantage

The benchmark count includes only results measured with a matching benchmark version and protocol. Arena scores are shown separately. Missing, preliminary, and incompatible data is not treated as a controlled win. Published point-score comparisons are labeled separately when protocol details are incomplete. For text-output models, the verdict also compares token pricing and context windows.

Chat with both models
vs

Performance benchmarks

Every value links to its source. A dash means that no reviewed result is available for that exact model and protocol.

FLUX.2 Klein 4B and Recraft V4 Styles Vector benchmark results
BenchmarkFLUX.2 Klein 4BRecraft V4 Styles Vector
AutomationBench-AA

A 657-task benchmark of multi-step work across simulated SaaS applications in six business domains. The Artificial Analysis protocol reports a guardrail-aware score and is distinct from both the public Zapier split and the unrelated dynamic AutoBench framework.

Guardrail-aware score

——
BrowseComp

A benchmark of difficult, verifiable information-seeking questions designed to measure an agent's ability to locate hard-to-find facts through web browsing.

Accuracy

——
OSWorld-Verified

A verified computer-use benchmark in which multimodal agents operate desktop applications and are graded from the resulting environment state.

Mean task reward

——
SWE-Bench Verified

A human-validated subset of real GitHub issues used to measure whether a coding agent can produce repository patches that resolve the associated tests.

Resolved

——
Terminal-Bench 2.1

Version 2.1 of the benchmark for completing realistic tasks in terminal environments. Harness, resource limits, and attempt count are part of the protocol.

Mean task success

——
AutoBench

A dynamic LLM evaluation framework in which models generate questions, answer them, and participate in reciprocal peer assessment. AutoBench is distinct from Zapier's AutomationBench.

Weighted peer-assessment score

——
GPQA Diamond

The highest-quality subset of Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A, designed to test expert-level scientific reasoning in biology, physics, and chemistry.

Accuracy

——
Humanity's Last Exam

A 2,500-question expert-level benchmark spanning dozens of academic fields. Tool-assisted and no-tools results are separate protocols and must not be merged.

Accuracy

——
Arena preference scores
Arena (Text-to-Image)

Human preference score for generated images

1030 ±3
—

Benchmark sources

Reviewed evidence last updated 2026-08-09. Arena data last refreshed Aug 28, 2026.

Pricing, capabilities, and model facts

FLUX.2 Klein 4B and Recraft V4 Styles Vector model facts
FeatureFLUX.2 Klein 4BRecraft V4 Styles Vector
Context & model facts
DeveloperBlack Forest LabsRecraft
API providerBlack Forest LabsRecraft
Input context40,960 tokens65,536 tokens
Maximum output36,864 tokens58,982 tokens
Released——
Added to WritingmateJan 14, 2026Aug 26, 2026
LicenseNot availableNot available
Knowledge cutoff——
Capabilities
InputsText, ImageText, Image
OutputsImageImage
Provider endpoint accepts tool parametersNoNo
ReasoningNoNo
VisionYesYes
Image GenerationYesYes
Video GenerationNoNo
API performance
p95 latencyNot measuredNot measured
Output throughputNot measuredNot measured
Writingmate shows API performance only when both models have enough observations from the same measurement window, prompt profile, and provider. Third-party latency values are not copied into this table.

Data sources

  • Writingmate model catalog (pricing, limits, and availability)

Catalog data last updated Aug 26, 2026.

Why Pay for Multiple Subscriptions?

Comparing FLUX.2 Klein 4B from Black Forest Labs with Recraft V4 Styles Vector from Recraft? Instead of managing separate API keys and subscriptions, get both with Writingmate.

Subscription-plan access for FLUX.2 Klein 4B and Recraft V4 Styles Vector
PlanPriceFLUX.2 Klein 4BRecraft V4 Styles VectorAI ImagesAI Video
Writingmate Pro
Most popular
$20/moIncludedIncludedNano Banana Pro, FLUX.2, DALL-E & moreSora 2, VEO 3.1
Writingmate Ultimate
Power users
$60/moIncludedIncludedNano Banana Pro, FLUX.2, DALL-E & moreSora 2, VEO 3.1
View Plans & Pricing

FLUX.2 Klein 4B vs Recraft V4 Styles Vector FAQ

Which is better, FLUX.2 Klein 4B or Recraft V4 Styles Vector?

There are not enough shared, protocol-compatible benchmark results to declare a performance leader.

Which model is cheaper to use through an API?

A comparable blended token price is not available for both models. Check the API pricing rows for the values that are currently published.

Which model supports more context?

Comparable context-window data is not available for both models.

Can I switch between FLUX.2 Klein 4B and Recraft V4 Styles Vector?

Yes. Use the model selector on this page to open any current Writingmate model comparison. You can also run the same prompt with both models in Writingmate.