What is the difference between this and ComfyOrg's quantitative model?
Hi, first of all, thank you for your contribution to the community! I am sorry to ask this question. As a novice, I have difficulty in choosing a model, and because the performance of the device is not good enough, I cannot test them one by one. If it is possible, can you tell me the correct answer directly?
Strange because comfyui ones are 14.3gb while these are 15gb
(well, less because HF use 1000 instead of 1024)
In practice: can use a bit more VRAM at load time in some workflows, but once running it’s often competitive or slightly faster than the default Comfy‑Org workflow. Quality is extremely close to FP16, especially in subtle detail, texture and motion.
better fp8 scaled models (when measured against fp16) with a quantization method inspired by Tencent’s HunyuanVideo FP8 code.
large linear weights in FP8, many small tensors (biases, norms, embeddings, head, modulation) kept in FP32 for extra stability.
Designed and tested together with the ComfyUI‑WanVideoWrapper, but also works with native WanVideo nodes.
Comfy-Org or KJ, Which one should you use?
Use Kijai FP8 if:
You care about squeezing every bit of quality out of the FP8 and value subtle detail, texture and motion coherence across many renders.
You’re using ComfyUI‑WanVideoWrapper or don’t mind experimenting a bit with workflows.
You can tolerate slightly higher VRAM use during load in exchange for potential quality/speed wins in actual generation.
Use Comfy‑Org FP8 if:
You want the “official” default that matches ComfyUI Wan2.2 tutorials and examples.
You prefer a stable, well‑documented setup that “just works” with native WanVideo nodes.
You mainly care about solid quality + VRAM savings, without chasing the last 1-2% of detail.
Think of Comfy‑Org FP8 as a reliable baseline, and Kijai FP8 as an enthusiast‑tuned variant with extra precision in key places and a slight edge in subtle detail.
