Skip to content

Leaderboard

Preference ratings from blind human votes, on an Elo-like scale — cost and speed were never visible to voters.

1Anthropic

Claude Opus 5

1623

±313

1/2 picked · $1.26/gen

provisional

2Anthropic

Claude Fable 5

1557

±96

20/60 picked · $1.04/gen

3OpenAI

GPT 5.6 Sol

1486

±97

18/72 picked · $0.305/gen

#ModelRatingVotesAvg cost
1
Claude Opus 5Anthropicprovisional
1623±313
2$1.26
2
Claude Fable 5Anthropic
1557±96
60$1.04
3
GPT 5.6 SolOpenAI
1486±97
72$0.305
4
Kimi K3Moonshot
1481±101
66$0.424
5
GLM 5.2Z.ai
1432±104
73$0.066

Ratings come from one preference model fitted to every blind vote at once (Plackett–Luce, on an Elo-like scale where +400 ≈ 10:1 odds). Because it’s fitted globally rather than accumulated vote by vote, a model added later is judged on its own record — not penalised for arriving late. ± is the 95% confidence interval; overlapping intervals mean the gap isn’t established yet. “Provisional” means too few votes to place confidently. W/L is times picked vs times shown. Cost and time are per full generation. ▲/▼ is the 7-day rank move.

Rating vs cost

Up and left is the value frontier — preferred by humans, cheap to run. The leader is highlighted in gold.

1425150015751650$0.05$0.1$0.2$0.5$1.00$2.00Avg cost per generation (log scale)RatingClaude Opus 5Claude Fable 5GPT 5.6 SolKimi K3GLM 5.2

Bubble size reflects vote volume.