Short answer: every serious tool generates a first version of a short video in two to ten minutes, so generation speed is not what separates them. What actually decides your turnaround is how much you have to fix afterwards. A tool that produces a watchable first pass in five minutes and needs ten minutes of review beats one that generates in ninety seconds and needs an hour of corrections. Judge the total, not the progress bar.

Why the advertised speed is misleading

Vendors quote generation time because it is the only part they control and the only part that sounds impressive. It is also the part you spend least time on. In practice the clock runs from pasting the URL to having something you would publish, and most of that is you reviewing scenes.

What actually makes it slow

Scenes that do not match the words

The biggest time sink. If the tool picks a stock clip of a city when the sentence is about pricing, you replace it by hand, and you do that twenty times. Tools that generate a picture for the sentence rather than searching for a near match create less of this work.

Visual inconsistency

If scene three is a photograph, scene four is a cartoon and scene five is a 3D render, the video does not hold together and you end up regenerating half of it. Choosing one style once, for the whole project, removes that round entirely.

Characters that change between scenes

Only matters if your post has recurring people in it, but when it does, it is fatal. A tool that draws each character once and reuses that drawing saves the pass where you try to make scene nine match scene two.

Re-rendering the whole video for one fix

Check whether you can regenerate a single scene or whether every change rebuilds the file. This is the difference between a two minute fix and a fifteen minute one, repeated.

Realistic timings

For a 1,000 word post turned into a sixty to ninety second video: two to ten minutes to generate, five to twenty minutes to review and adjust, two to five minutes to export. Call it fifteen to thirty minutes end to end for something you would publish. Anyone promising a finished, publishable video in under five minutes with no review is describing the demo, not the job.

How to test it in ten minutes

Take one post you have already published. Run it through. Do not pick your best post, pick a typical one. Then count how many scenes you had to change before you would put your name on it. That number, not the generation time, is the answer to which service is fastest for you.

Questions people ask

Does a longer blog post take longer?

Generation scales roughly with length, but review time scales faster, because there are more scenes to check. A 3,000 word post is not three times the work of a 1,000 word one, it is more.

Can I batch several posts at once?

Some tools support queueing. It helps with generation time and does nothing for review time, which is the part that matters.

Test it on one of your own posts

The only honest benchmark is your content, not a demo. Try it with a blog URL and time the whole thing, including the fixing.