{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreielepo6wms7q63edtiv6emmlrredd4pekspfzywvxm6itat7azrtu",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:pgryn3ephfd2xgft23qokfzt/app.bsky.feed.post/3mmidjtfxsk52"
  },
  "path": "/t/wan2-2-i2v-clarifications-needed-regarding-settings-on-low-vram-system/175884#post_17",
  "publishedAt": "2026-05-23T01:22:31.000Z",
  "site": "https://discuss.huggingface.co",
  "tags": [
    "@John6666"
  ],
  "textContent": "Incredibly useful information in here everyone!\n\nNot recommended to digest all in one sitting though (unless you’re an agent and not a mere hooman). Kinda makes you miss the “simplicity” of Wan 2.1. The 3-step workflow seems like a cakewalk in comparison. Pick your resolution, quantization, and top it off with customization (LoRAs+experiments).\n\nI’m _**still**_ seeing incredibly high usage of Wan2.1 (in relative terms) and some hesitation/reluctance to adopt wan v2.2 (and up) by the general public as well as “veterans” on HF and other platforms that aren’t ComfyUI-centric. And… understandably so, IMO. 2.1 when used correctly is still incredibly powerful and robust, and the economics of running these models, for the majority of people, heavily favors 2.1.\n\nThe high/low noise differentiation could have been better explained or conceptualized, IMO, by the WAN team as well as by us, the community. Probably a bit late though, as 2.2 itself is on the cusp of being overshadowed by the next iteration of models.\n\nAnyways, thanks for the wealth of knowledge @John6666 - bookmarkin’ forsure!",
  "title": "Wan2.2 i2v (clarifications needed regarding settings on low vram system)"
}