Benchmark Almanac

WildVision Arena

GPT-4O (snapshot unspecified) 1,235 tops its leaderboard Claude 3 Opus 1,100 leads the models we track
Not in model cards

Users upload an image with a question, compare answers from two anonymous vision-language models, and vote. Votes give Elo ratings.

The model-judged WildVision-Bench was built from its conversations and has its own record. The Hugging Face space was last updated on December 22nd, 2024.

Released
February 2024
Kind
General visual questions
Level
Everyday
Scored
Ranked by votes
Answers
Open-ended
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
Claude 3 Opus #172 on the capability index
Last model added
April 2024
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

Recent breakthroughs in vision-language models (VLMs) emphasize the necessity of benchmarking human preferences in real-world multimodal interactions. To address this gap, we launched WildVision-Arena (WV-Arena), an online platform that collects human preferences to evaluate VLMs. We curated WV-Bench by selecting 500 high-quality samples from 8,000 user submissions in WV-Arena. WV-Bench uses GPT-4 as the judge to compare each VLM with Claude-3-Sonnet, achieving a Spearman correlation of 0.94 with the WV-Arena Elo. This significantly outperforms other benchmarks like MMVet, MMMU, and MMStar. Our comprehensive analysis of 20K real-world interactions reveals important insights into the failure cases of top-performing VLMs. For example, we find that although GPT-4V surpasses many other models like Reka-Flash, Opus, and Yi-VL-Plus in simple visual recognition and reasoning tasks, it still faces challenges with subtle contextual cues, spatial reasoning, visual imagination, and expert domain knowledge. Additionally, current VLMs exhibit issues with hallucinations and safety when intentionally provoked. We are releasing our chat and feedback data to further advance research in the field of VLMs.

Abstract of WildVision: Evaluating Vision-Language Models in the Wild with Human Preferences (arXiv:2406.11069, CC0)
22
Entries on its own leaderboard, 10 models we track

GPT-4O (snapshot unspecified) tops the leaderboard with 1,235

Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders. The best model we track is Claude 3 Opus, at 1,100.

The newest model with a score here came out in April 2024, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

Bars start at 800.

  1. 1 GPT-4O (snapshot unspecified) 1,235
  2. 2 GPT-4-Vision (snapshot unspecified) 1,132
  3. 3 Reka-Flash (snapshot unspecified) 1,107
  4. 4 Claude 3 Opus 1,100
  5. 5 Gemini-Pro-Vision (snapshot unspecified) 1,061
  6. 6 Yi-VL-PLUS 1,061
  7. 7 LLaVA-v1.6-34B 1,059
  8. 8 Gemini-1.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified) 1,055
  9. 9 Claude 3 Sonnet 1,044
  10. 10 CogVLM-Chat-HF 13B 1,016
  11. 11 Claude 3 Haiku 1,002
  12. 12 LLaVA-NEXT 7B 992
  13. 13 DeepSeek-VL-7B-Chat 979
  14. 14 Idefics2-8B 965
  15. 15 llava-v1.6-vicuna-13b 956
  16. 16 Qwen-VL-Chat 10B 930
  17. 17 Bunny-v1.0-3B 921
  18. 18 MiniCPM-V 3B 910
  19. 19 LLaVA-v1.5-13B 891
  20. 20 Tiny-LLaVA-v1-HF 3B 879
  21. 21 instructblip-vicuna-7b 862
  22. 22 UFORM-Gen2-Qwen 500M 827

Source: Official WildVision Arena leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 GPT-4O (snapshot unspecified) 1,235 Official leaderboard
2 GPT-4-Vision (snapshot unspecified) 1,132 Official leaderboard
3 Reka-Flash (snapshot unspecified) 1,107 Official leaderboard
4 Claude 3 Opus 1,100 Feb 2024 Official leaderboard
5 Gemini-Pro-Vision (snapshot unspecified) 1,061 Official leaderboard
6 Yi-VL-PLUS 1,061 Official leaderboard
7 LLaVA-v1.6-34B 1,059 Jan 2024 Official leaderboard
8 Gemini-1.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified) 1,055 Official leaderboard
9 Claude 3 Sonnet 1,044 Feb 2024 Official leaderboard
10 CogVLM-Chat-HF 13B 1,016 Official leaderboard
11 Claude 3 Haiku 1,002 Mar 2024 Official leaderboard
12 LLaVA-NEXT 7B 992 Official leaderboard
13 DeepSeek-VL-7B-Chat 979 Mar 2024 Official leaderboard
14 Idefics2-8B 965 Apr 2024 Official leaderboard
15 llava-v1.6-vicuna-13b 956 Jan 2024 Official leaderboard
16 Qwen-VL-Chat 10B 930 Official leaderboard
17 Bunny-v1.0-3B 921 Feb 2024 Official leaderboard
18 MiniCPM-V 3B 910 Official leaderboard
19 LLaVA-v1.5-13B 891 Oct 2023 Official leaderboard
20 Tiny-LLaVA-v1-HF 3B 879 Official leaderboard
21 instructblip-vicuna-7b 862 May 2023 Official leaderboard
22 UFORM-Gen2-Qwen 500M 827 Official leaderboard

2 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in February 2024

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.

University of Wisconsin-Madison Anthropic
Own leaderboard Not tested since Apr 2024

Source: Official WildVision Arena leaderboard

Scores over time

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

On the benchmark’s own leaderboard
850 900 950 1,000 1,050 1,100 2023 2024 850 900 950 1,000 1,050 1,100 2023 2024

Source: Official WildVision Arena leaderboard

No lab model card reports it yet

We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.

More in Vision

All 281 in Vision
  • MMMU In use 11.5K college-level multimodal questions across 30 subjects. Multiple-choice and open accuracy. GPT-5.1 85.4%
  • MMMU-Pro In use Harder MMMU: college-level multimodal questions with more options and vision-only inputs to remove text shortcuts. GPT-5.6 Sol 84.6%
  • CharXiv In use Chart understanding on real arXiv figures. Reasoning questions require synthesizing information from complex charts. Claude Fable 5 93.5%
  • MATH-Vision (MathVision) In use 3,040 competition math problems with visual context. Answer accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 97.7%
  • MMStar In use Models answer 1,500 human-curated image questions that cannot be solved without the image, across 6 core capabilities. Scored by accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 85.9%
  • ChartQA In use Models answer human-written and generated questions about chart images that need visual and arithmetic reasoning. Scored by relaxed accuracy with a 5 percent numeric tolerance. Command A Vision 90.9%