
Ideogram 3.0
Image generation built around one job: rendering readable text inside images.
About
Ideogram 3.0, released March 2025, is a text-to-image model from former Google Brain researchers that specializes in typography - signs, posters, logos, book covers, and packaging come out with text spelled correctly instead of smeared. Version 3.0 improved photorealism, prompt following, and added Style Reference (up to 3 reference images), plus the Canvas editor with Magic Fill and Extend for inpainting and background extension. Honest limitations: reviewers find it lags Midjourney on pure artistic depth and concept art, human faces can be inconsistent, and free generations are public by default. It is a specialist tool, not an all-purpose image generalist.
Specs
Context window
Pricing
Free quota
API access
Weights
Released
Benchmarks
Company-claimed at launch: highest ELO rating in human evaluations across diverse prompts. Text-rendering accuracy reported ~90% by the company vs ~30-40% for Midjourney; one independent review noted it had not verified a head-to-head test. Treat these figures as directional rather than independent benchmarks.
Provider-reported unless a source says otherwise. Benchmarks are marketing-adjacent by nature — treat them as directional.
Use cases
Trust score — 6/10
Scored 6/10 (metrics tier, metrics-v1). Evidence: Official release page blocked for direct fetch (403); verified via 5 secondary sources with consistent facts; Release date, feature set, and pricing tiers consistent across reviews and API docs; Benchmark claims are company-reported; no independent head-to-head verified. License: Proprietary hosted service; no open weights (Ideogram 4.0 later released open weights, not 3.0)..
How the trust score is built
Full methodology →- Adoption · stars/downloads, log-scaled vs peers
- 7.0/10
- Maintenance · recency, releases, issue load
- 8.0/10
- Openness · license + docs
- 2.0/10
- Manual review · sanity read + red-flag check
- 7.0/10
- · Official release page blocked for direct fetch (403); verified via 5 secondary sources with consistent facts
- · Release date, feature set, and pricing tiers consistent across reviews and API docs
- · Benchmark claims are company-reported; no independent head-to-head verified