ArtifactsBench
Models generate interactive visual code artifacts for 1,825 tasks. An MLLM judge scores rendered screenshots and code against a per-task checklist.
- Made by
- Tencent Hunyuan
- Released
- July 2025
- Kind
- Web and app front ends
- Level
- University
- Scored
- Graded by a model
- Answers
- Open-ended
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- GPT-5 #70 on the capability index
- Last in a launch post
- July 2026
- Last model added
- July 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
The generative capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) are rapidly expanding from static code to dynamic, interactive visual artifacts. This progress is bottlenecked by a critical evaluation gap: established benchmarks focus on algorithmic correctness and are blind to the visual fidelity and interactive integrity that define modern user experiences. To bridge this gap, we introduce ArtifactsBench, a new benchmark and paradigm for the automated, multimodal evaluation of visual code generation. Our framework programmatically renders each generated artifact and captures its dynamic behavior through temporal screenshots. This visual evidence, alongside the source code, is then assessed by a Multimodal LLM (MLLM)-as-Judge, which is rigorously guided by a fine-grained, per-task checklist to ensure holistic and reproducible scoring. We construct a new benchmark of 1,825 diverse tasks and evaluate over 30 leading LLMs. Our automated evaluation achieves a striking 94.4% ranking consistency with WebDev Arena, the gold-standard for human preference in web development, and over 90% pairwise agreement with human experts. This establishes ArtifactsBench as the first framework to reliably automate the assessment of human-perceived quality at scale. Our analysis provides a high-resolution map of the current SOTA, revealing that generalist models often outperform domain-specific ones. We open-source ArtifactsBench, including the benchmark, evaluation harness, and baseline results at https://artifactsbenchmark.github.io/, to provide the community with a scalable and accurate tool to accelerate the development of user-centric generative models.
MiniMax-M2 leads with 66.8% among models released by July 2026
Best score per model as labs report them in their own cards. Labs pick their own settings, so these compare less cleanly than independent runs.
GPT-5 leads with 72.5% across all independent runs
Best score per model across the official leaderboard, Epoch AI’s own runs and any board Epoch AI copied. Each bar and row names its source.
GPT-5 leads with 72.5%, claims included
Best score per model from every source, including labs’ own numbers and claims Epoch AI collected from reports and papers. Labs pick their own settings, so a claim can beat an independent run of the same model.
The newest model with a score here came out in July 2026, and nobody has reported a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- Claude Fable 5.2
-
Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- and 16 more
- 1
MiniMax-M2 66.8%
- 2
Seed2.0 Pro 66.6%
- 3
Solar Open 2 55.9%
- 4
Hunyuan-A13B-Instruct 43%
- 5
MAI-Code-1-Flash 36.4%
Source: Labs’ model cards
- 72.5 GPT-5
- 59.8 Claude Opus 4.1
- 57.7
Gemini 2.5 Pro
- 57.3 Claude Sonnet 4
- 56.9 gpt-oss-120b
- 55.0
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking
- 54.0 o3
- 51.3 GLM-4.5
- 51.3 Claude 3.7 Sonnet
- 50.6
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct
- 48.9 GLM-4.5-Air
- 47.7
DeepSeek-R1
- 47.6 Kimi K2
- 47.1
Qwen3-Coder-480B-A35B
- 46.0 GPT-4.1
- 43.5
DeepSeek-V3
- 41.1
Qwen3-235B-A22B
- 41.0
Hunyuan-A13B-Instruct
- 39.9 Claude 3.5 Sonnet (October 2024)
- 33.5 GPT-4o
- 1 GPT-5 72.5%
- 2 Claude Opus 4.1 59.8%
- 3
Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 57.7%
- 4 Claude Sonnet 4 57.3%
- 5 gpt-oss-120b 56.9%
- 6
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking Jul 2025 55%
- 7 o3 54%
- 8 GLM-4.5 51.3%
- 9 Claude 3.7 Sonnet 51.3%
- 10
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct Jul 2025 50.6%
- 11 GLM-4.5-Air 48.9%
- 12
DeepSeek-R1 May 2025 47.7%
- 13 Kimi K2 Jul 2025 47.6%
- 14
Qwen3-Coder-480B-A35B 47.1%
- 15 GPT-4.1 46%
- 16
DeepSeek-V3 Mar 2025 43.5%
- 17
Qwen3-235B-A22B 41.1%
- 18
Hunyuan-A13B-Instruct 41%
- 19 Claude 3.5 Sonnet (October 2024) 39.9%
- 20 GPT-4o Mar 2025 33.5%
Source: Official ArtifactsBench leaderboard
- 72.5 GPT-5
- 66.8
MiniMax-M2
- 66.6
Seed2.0 Pro
- 59.8 Claude Opus 4.1
- 57.7
Gemini 2.5 Pro
- 57.3 Claude Sonnet 4
- 56.9 gpt-oss-120b
- 55.9
Solar Open 2
- 55.0
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking
- 54.0 o3
- 51.3 GLM-4.5
- 51.3 Claude 3.7 Sonnet
- 50.6
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct
- 48.9 GLM-4.5-Air
- 47.7
DeepSeek-R1
- 47.6 Kimi K2
- 47.1
Qwen3-Coder-480B-A35B
- 46.0 GPT-4.1
- 43.5
DeepSeek-V3
- 43.0
Hunyuan-A13B-Instruct
- 41.1
Qwen3-235B-A22B
- 39.9 Claude 3.5 Sonnet (October 2024)
- 36.4
MAI-Code-1-Flash
- 33.5 GPT-4o
- 1 GPT-5 72.5%
- 2
MiniMax-M2 66.8%
- 3
Seed2.0 Pro 66.6%
- 4 Claude Opus 4.1 59.8%
- 5
Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 57.7%
- 6 Claude Sonnet 4 57.3%
- 7 gpt-oss-120b 56.9%
- 8
Solar Open 2 55.9%
- 9
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking Jul 2025 55%
- 10 o3 54%
- 11 GLM-4.5 51.3%
- 12 Claude 3.7 Sonnet 51.3%
- 13
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct Jul 2025 50.6%
- 14 GLM-4.5-Air 48.9%
- 15
DeepSeek-R1 May 2025 47.7%
- 16 Kimi K2 Jul 2025 47.6%
- 17
Qwen3-Coder-480B-A35B 47.1%
- 18 GPT-4.1 46%
- 19
DeepSeek-V3 Mar 2025 43.5%
- 20
Hunyuan-A13B-Instruct 43%
- 21
Qwen3-235B-A22B 41.1%
- 22 Claude 3.5 Sonnet (October 2024) 39.9%
- 23
MAI-Code-1-Flash 36.4%
- 24 GPT-4o Mar 2025 33.5%
Sources: Official ArtifactsBench leaderboard and labs’ model cards
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 66.8% | Oct 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | | 66.6% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | | 55.9% | Jul 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 4 | | 43% | Jun 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 5 | | 36.4% | Jun 2026 | Lab model card |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT-5 | 72.5% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | Claude Opus 4.1 | 59.8% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | | 57.7% | Jun 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | Claude Sonnet 4 | 57.3% | May 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | gpt-oss-120b | 56.9% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | | 55% | Jul 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | o3 | 54% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | GLM-4.5 | 51.3% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | 51.3% | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | | 50.6% | Jul 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | GLM-4.5-Air | 48.9% | Jul 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | | 47.7% | May 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | Kimi K2 Jul 2025 | 47.6% | Jul 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | | 47.1% | Jul 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 15 | GPT-4.1 | 46% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | | 43.5% | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | | 41.1% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 18 | | 41% | Jun 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 19 | Claude 3.5 Sonnet (October 2024) | 39.9% | Oct 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 20 | GPT-4o Mar 2025 | 33.5% | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT-5 | 72.5% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | | 66.8% | Oct 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | | 66.6% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 4 | Claude Opus 4.1 | 59.8% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | | 57.7% | Jun 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | Claude Sonnet 4 | 57.3% | May 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | gpt-oss-120b | 56.9% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | | 55.9% | Jul 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 9 | | 55% | Jul 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | o3 | 54% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | GLM-4.5 | 51.3% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | 51.3% | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | | 50.6% | Jul 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | GLM-4.5-Air | 48.9% | Jul 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 15 | | 47.7% | May 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | Kimi K2 Jul 2025 | 47.6% | Jul 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | | 47.1% | Jul 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 18 | GPT-4.1 | 46% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 19 | | 43.5% | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 20 | | 43% | Jun 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 21 | | 41.1% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 22 | Claude 3.5 Sonnet (October 2024) | 39.9% | Oct 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 23 | | 36.4% | Jun 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 24 | GPT-4o Mar 2025 | 33.5% | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard |
The benchmark's own leaderboard has 21 entries, 20 of them models we track. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
2 models have held number one in labs’ own numbers since its release in July 2025 3 models have held number one across all independent runs since its release in July 2025 3 models have held number one with claims included since its release in July 2025
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release. We draw one row each for the benchmark’s own leaderboard and what labs claim in their cards.
Sources: Official ArtifactsBench leaderboard and labs’ model cards
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Sources: Official ArtifactsBench leaderboard and labs’ model cards
2 labs put it in a launch post in the last six months
Launch posts from every lab that has listed it, one tick per post. Tall colored ticks include it, and short gray ones leave it out.
| Date | Launch post | Score | As the post writes it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 22, 2026 | 55.9 | ArtifactsBench | |
| Jun 2, 2026 | 36.4 | Artifacts Bench | |
| Feb 14, 2026 | 66.6 | ArtifactsBench | |
| Oct 27, 2025 | 66.8 | ArtifactsBench | |
| Jun 27, 2025 | 43 | ArtifactsBench |
4 system cards report it, from 4 labs
Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 22, 2026 | | 55.9 | ArtifactsBench (Table 3) | Capabilities |
| Jun 2, 2026 | | 36.4 | Artifacts Bench, Visual coding, Acc (Core reasoning table) | Capabilities |
| Feb 14, 2026 | | 66.6 | ArtifactsBench (Table 11) | Capabilities |
| Jun 26, 2025 | | 43 | ArtifactsBench, slow-thinking (Table 3) | Capabilities |
One lab claim next to the leaderboard
Each score a lab reported for its own model, beside the same model's best score on the leaderboard. Gaps mostly come from different harnesses, effort levels and task subsets. Every benchmark.
| Model | Lab says | Board says | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| | 43% ArtifactsBench | 41% Leaderboard | +2.0 pts |
Versions
We switch the top row to each new version when it comes out. Open it for one row per version. An old version stays in play while people still test it, so whoever first takes it past 85% gets credit for closing it out.
Sources: Official leaderboards and labs’ model cards
More in Coding
- SWE-bench Verified In use 500 human-validated GitHub issues from 12 Python repos. Agent writes a patch that must pass hidden tests. Claude Opus 4.7 83.5%
- LiveCodeBench v6 In use Competitive programming problems collected after model cutoffs from LeetCode, AtCoder, Codeforces. Scored pass@1 on hidden tests.
DeepSeek-V4-Pro 93.5%
- SWE-bench Multilingual In use 300 GitHub-issue tasks across nine programming languages in SWE-bench format. Patch graded by repository tests. Claude Fable 5.2 96.6%
- DeepSWE In use 113 original long-horizon engineering tasks across 91 repos and five languages, written from scratch. Hand-written verifiers accept alternative solutions. GPT-6 Astra 74.1%
- SciCode In use Scientist-curated research coding problems split into subproblems across natural sciences. Code checked against test cases.
Seed2.1 Pro 59.8%
- Codeforces rating In use Model solves recent Codeforces contest problems. An Elo-style rating is computed from simulated contest performance.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 3,471