RN
Getting one good anime image out of a generator is easy. It has been easy for a while. The prompt barely matters, the model does most of the work, and the failure rate is low enough that a couple of tries will produce something you would keep.
Getting the same character in a second image is where the category actually separates, and there is no way to judge it from the outside.
The consistency problem
A landing-page gallery is a set of independent draws. Each image is a one-shot, curated after the fact from however many attempts it took. Nothing in it tells you what happens when you ask for the same girl in a different pose, in a different outfit, in a different room — which is the entire job if you are producing anything longer than a single picture.
Services approach this in different ways: seed locking, reference-image conditioning, a character object you save and reuse, or a trained embedding. The approaches have genuinely different capabilities and genuinely different failure modes, and marketing copy for all of them says "consistent characters".
The test takes ten minutes and is the only one worth running: make a character, then generate it four more times with one variable changed each time. Watch what drifts. Hair length and eye colour usually hold. Face structure, body proportion and clothing detail are where the honest answer lives.
What you are actually buying
Almost every generator meters output in credits, and the meter is the product. The subscription buys an allowance; the allowance is priced against how many attempts a picture takes.
That last part is the number nobody publishes and the one that decides the cost. A tool with a 20% keep rate at half the credit cost is more expensive than it looks, and a tool that nails the first attempt is cheap at twice the price. You cannot know your keep rate in advance, which is a good argument for never buying an annual plan in this category before you have used a month of it.
The other unpublished number is where free stops. This directory's entry for PromptChan Hentai records a free-to-start generator with a Pro upgrade whose price and cut-off point are both unstated — and with a generator, the cut-off is the number that decides everything, because it determines whether the free tier is a trial or a demo.
Where a price is published, it is worth noting as a fact about the company as much as about the cost. The entry for TryNectar records a published monthly rate, which is unusual enough in this category to be a signal in itself, though what the free tier includes before it stops is not specified there either.
Half of these are not generators
A recurring feature of these lists is that they mix two different products.
Some services are generators: you write a prompt, you get an image, the whole interface is built around output. Others are companion apps that grew an image page — the chat is the product, and the generator exists to illustrate it. TryNectar is the second kind, an AI companion service that does video calls and chat with image generation attached rather than an image tool with a chat bolt-on.
Both can produce anime art. They are not interchangeable. A companion app's generator is tuned to produce this character, in this conversation, and it is often better at consistency for exactly that reason and worse at everything else. A dedicated generator gives you control over style, composition and negative prompting that a chat-embedded one usually will not expose.
Decide which product you want before you compare prices, because the price comparison across the two is meaningless.
How to judge quality without trusting anyone
The single most useful feature a generator can have is a public feed of what users actually made.
PromptChan's entry notes an explore feed you can browse before creating anything — real output rather than curated marketing samples. That is the difference between seeing a company's best twenty images of the year and seeing what a normal person got on Tuesday. Where a service offers that, use it, and scroll past the front page of it; the top of any feed is selected by engagement and looks like the marketing.
Where a service offers no such feed, treat its gallery as an upper bound and nothing else.
Style range is worth checking the same way. "Anime" spans cel-shaded flat art, painterly semi-realism, manga screentone and the glossy 3D look, and most models are strongly biased toward one of them regardless of what you ask for. If you want a specific look, that bias matters more than resolution or speed.
The line
Two things are not a matter of taste, a matter of policy preference, or something a permissive tool should be praised for allowing.
The first is real people. Generating sexual images of an identifiable person who has not agreed to it is a serious harm to that person and is illegal in a growing number of places. A tool that lets you upload a face and a tool that has a celebrity list are both offering the same thing, and no amount of "it's fake" changes what it is used for. This is a different category from a generator and it is covered separately in the AI porn overview.
The second is that a style built on youthful-looking characters attracts prompts it should refuse, and a generator's handling of that is not an inconvenience to route around. Services with no position on it are not more free; they are less careful, and being less careful in this specific direction is the one thing in the category with consequences beyond a wasted subscription.
Where to look
This directory's checked entries sit under AI hentai generators and, more broadly, AI porn generators. If you want to read art rather than make it, hentai streaming and the manga sections are a different and considerably cheaper hobby.