Arena-Hard v2.0
Models answer 500 hard real user prompts from Chatbot Arena and 250 creative writing prompts. GPT-4.1 or Gemini 2.5 judges each answer against a baseline answer from o3-mini, and the score is the win rate.
Released on 2025-04-23 with new prompts, new judges and a new baseline (o3-mini at 50.0). Scores are not comparable with Arena-Hard-Auto v0.1. Labs often report the hard prompt split only.
In the authors’ words
The rapid evolution of Large Language Models (LLMs) has outpaced the development of model evaluation, highlighting the need for continuous curation of new, challenging benchmarks. However, manual curation of high-quality, human-aligned benchmarks is expensive and time-consuming. To address this, we introduce BenchBuilder, an automated pipeline that leverages LLMs to curate high-quality, open-ended prompts from large, crowd-sourced datasets, enabling continuous benchmark updates without human in the loop. We apply BenchBuilder to datasets such as Chatbot Arena and WildChat-1M, extracting challenging prompts and utilizing LLM-as-a-Judge for automatic model evaluation. To validate benchmark quality, we propose new metrics to measure a benchmark's alignment with human preferences and ability to separate models. We release Arena-Hard-Auto, a benchmark consisting 500 challenging prompts curated by BenchBuilder. Arena-Hard-Auto provides 3x higher separation of model performances compared to MT-Bench and achieves 98.6% correlation with human preference rankings, all at a cost of $20. Our work sets a new framework for the scalable curation of automated benchmarks from extensive data.
- Level
- University Undergraduates and entry-level professionals
- Scored
- Graded by a model A language model scores each response, usually against a rubric.
- Answers
- Open-ended Free-form text, documents, designs or media judged as a whole.
Qwen3-Max leads with 90.2% among models released by Aug 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.
The newest model with a score here came out in Aug 2026, and nobody has reported a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6.1 Terra
- GPT-6.1 Sol
- and 16 more
- 90.2
Qwen3-Max
- 86.5
LongCat-Flash-Chat
- 83.5
Nemotron-Cascade 2 30B-A3B
- 81.6
Ring-1T
- 79.7
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking
- 74.8
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B
- 74.8
Solar Open 100B
- 74.7
Solar Pro 3 (March 2026 update)
- 74.0
Step 3.5 Flash
- 73.9
Nemotron 3 Super
- 71.0 Sarvam 105B
- 69.9
LongCat-Flash-Thinking
- 67.9 Granite 4.2 30B
- 67.7
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B-A3B
- 62.5
Solar Pro 3
- 62.3
Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B
- 58.6
STEP3-VL-10B
- 55.1
Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B
- 54.5 Kimi K2
- 54.1 MiMo-V2-Flash
- 49.0 Sarvam 30B
- 46.2
Solar Pro 2
- 45.8
Baichuan-M2-32B
- 43.1
Mistral Small 3.2
- 1
Qwen3-Max 90.2%
- 2
LongCat-Flash-Chat 86.5%
- 3
Nemotron-Cascade 2 30B-A3B 83.5%
- 4
Ring-1T 81.6%
- 5
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking Jul 2025 79.7%
- 6
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B 74.8%
- 7
Solar Open 100B 74.8%
- 8
Solar Pro 3 (March 2026 update) 74.7%
- 9
Step 3.5 Flash 74%
- 10
Nemotron 3 Super 73.9%
- 11 Sarvam 105B 71%
- 12
LongCat-Flash-Thinking 69.9%
- 13 Granite 4.2 30B 67.9%
- 14
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B-A3B 67.7%
- 15
Solar Pro 3 62.5%
- 16
Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B 62.3%
- 17
STEP3-VL-10B 58.6%
- 18
Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B 55.1%
- 19 Kimi K2 Jul 2025 54.5%
- 20 MiMo-V2-Flash 54.1%
- 21 Sarvam 30B 49%
- 22
Solar Pro 2 46.2%
- 23
Baichuan-M2-32B 45.8%
- 24
Mistral Small 3.2 43.1%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 90.2% | Jan 2026 | Model card | |
| 2 | | 86.5% | Aug 2025 | Model card | |
| 3 | | 83.5% | Mar 2026 | Model card | |
| 4 | | 81.6% | Oct 2025 | Model card | |
| 5 | | 79.7% | Jul 2025 | Model card | |
| 6 | | 74.8% | Nov 2025 | Model card | |
| 7 | | 74.8% | Dec 2025 | Model card | |
| 8 | | 74.7% | Mar 2026 | Model card | |
| 9 | | 74% | Feb 2026 | Model card | |
| 10 | | 73.9% | Mar 2026 | Model card | |
| 11 | Sarvam 105B | 71% | Mar 2026 | Model card | |
| 12 | | 69.9% | Sep 2025 | Model card | |
| 13 | Granite 4.2 30B | 67.9% | Aug 2026 | Model card | |
| 14 | | 67.7% | Dec 2025 | Model card | |
| 15 | | 62.5% | Jan 2026 | Model card | |
| 16 | | 62.3% | Sep 2025 | Model card | |
| 17 | | 58.6% | Jan 2026 | Model card | |
| 18 | | 55.1% | Sep 2025 | Model card | |
| 19 | Kimi K2 Jul 2025 | 54.5% | Jul 2025 | Model card | |
| 20 | MiMo-V2-Flash | 54.1% | Dec 2025 | Model card | |
| 21 | Sarvam 30B | 49% | Mar 2026 | Model card | |
| 22 | | 46.2% | Jul 2025 | Model card | |
| 23 | | 45.8% | Aug 2025 | Model card | |
| 24 | | 43.1% | Jun 2025 | Model card |
The benchmark's own leaderboard has 25 entries, 23 of them models we track. We plot every source in the charts below.
Scores at each effort level
Models the leaderboard ran at two or more effort levels. We don’t have enough cost data here to say what the extra effort costs.
| Model | Effort | Harness | Score | Cost per task | Output tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| o3 | 85.9% | ||||
| o4-mini | high | 79.1% | |||
| | 79% | ||||
| o4-mini | 74.6% | ||||
| | 68.6% | ||||
| o3-mini | high | 66.1% | |||
| o1 | high | 61% | |||
| Claude 3.7 Sonnet | thinking 16k | 59.8% | |||
| | 58.4% | ||||
| | 58% | ||||
| o1 | 55.9% | ||||
| o3-mini | 50% | ||||
| GPT-4.5 | 50% | ||||
| GPT-4.1 | 50% | ||||
| GPT-4.1 mini | 46.9% | ||||
| | 44.5% | ||||
| | 43.5% | ||||
| | 33.9% | ||||
| Claude 3.5 Sonnet (October 2024) | 33% | ||||
| | 17.2% | ||||
| | 16.4% | ||||
| | 15% | ||||
| | 15% | ||||
| GPT-4.1 nano | 13.7% | ||||
| | 10.3% | ||||
| | 10.1% |
2 models have held number one since its release in Apr 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.
The best score passed 85% in Apr 2025
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Labs headline it less often now, last in Aug 2026
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 25 Aug 2026 | Granite 4.2 30B | 67.9 | Arena-Hard-V2 |
| 24 Mar 2026 | 74.7 | Arena-hard-v2 | |
| 19 Mar 2026 | 83.5 | ArenaHard v2 (Avg.); Hard Prompt 88.2, Creative Writing 78.7 | |
| 11 Mar 2026 | 73.9 | Arena-Hard-V2 | |
| 6 Mar 2026 | Sarvam 30B | 49 | Arena Hard v2 |
| 6 Mar 2026 | Sarvam 105B | 71 | Arena Hard v2 |
| 26 Jan 2026 | 62.5 | Arena Hard v2 | |
| 23 Jan 2026 | 90.2 | Arena-Hard v2 | |
| 31 Dec 2025 | 74.8 | Arena Hard v2 | |
| 16 Dec 2025 | MiMo-V2-Flash | 54.1 | Arena-Hard (Hard Prompt) 54.1, Creative Writing 86.2 |
| 15 Dec 2025 | 67.7 | Arena-Hard-V2 (Average); Hard Prompt 72.1, Creative Writing 63.2 | |
| 10 Oct 2025 | 81.6 | Arena-Hard-v2.0 (win-rate) | |
| 22 Sep 2025 | 55.1 | Arena-Hard v2 (Thinking variant) | |
| 21 Sep 2025 | 69.9 | Arena-Hard(hard prompt gemini) | |
| 11 Sep 2025 | 62.3 | Arena-Hard v2* (win rate judged by GPT-4.1) | |
| 29 Aug 2025 | 86.5 | ArenaHard-V2(acc) | |
| 10 Aug 2025 | 45.8 | Arena-Hard-v2.0 | |
| 25 Jul 2025 | 79.7 | Arena-Hard v2$ | |
| 10 Jul 2025 | 46.2 | Arena-Hard-v2.0 | |
| 20 Jun 2025 | 43.1 | Arena Hard v2 |
14 system cards report it, from 9 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19 Mar 2026 | | 83.5 | ArenaHard v2 (Avg.) (Table 1). Hard Prompt 88.2, Creative Writing 78.7 | Capabilities |
| 11 Mar 2026 | | 73.9 | Arena-Hard-V2 (Hard Prompt) (Tables 5 and 8) | Capabilities |
| 11 Feb 2026 | | 74 | Arena-Hard-v2.0, GPT-4.1 judge (Table 5). PaCoRe 93.1 | Capabilities |
| 14 Jan 2026 | | 58.6 | Arena-Hard-V2, SeRe (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| 11 Jan 2026 | | 74.8 | Arena Hard v2 (Table 6) | Capabilities |
| 6 Jan 2026 | MiMo-V2-Flash technical report | 54.1 | Arena-Hard (Hard Prompt) 54.1, Arena-Hard (Creative Writing) 86.2 (Table 9) | Capabilities |
| 23 Dec 2025 | | 67.7 | Arena-Hard-V2 (Average), GPT-4.1 judge (Table 3). Hard Prompt 72.10, Creative Writing 63.20 | Capabilities |
| 26 Nov 2025 | | 74.8 | Arena-Hard V2 (winrate) (Table 6) | Capabilities |
| 21 Oct 2025 | | 81.6 | ArenaHard v2 (win-rate) (Table 1). ArenaHard v2 (Elo) 84.52 | Capabilities |
| 23 Sep 2025 | | 69.9 | Arena-Hard(hard prompt gemini) (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| 22 Sep 2025 | | 55.1 | Arena-Hard v2, Thinking only (Table 5) | Capabilities |
| 2 Sep 2025 | | 45.8 | Arena-Hard-V2.0 (Table 1) | Capabilities |
| 1 Sep 2025 | | 86.5 | ArenaHard-V2 (acc) (Table 3) | Capabilities |
| 21 Jul 2025 | Kimi K2 technical report | 54.5 | Arena Hard v2.0 Hard Prompt (Win rate). Creative Writing (Win rate) 85.0 (Table 3) | Capabilities |
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.
More in Instructions and chat
- IFEval In use Models answer about 500 prompts containing verifiable instructions such as word limits or required keywords. Code checks each instruction for strict and loose accuracy.
Gemma 4 31B IT 98.9%
- IFBench In use 58 new out-of-domain verifiable output constraints. Scored by programmatic constraint checks (strict or loose).
Nemotron-Cascade 2 30B-A3B 82.9%
- MultiChallenge In use Multi-turn conversations testing instruction retention, inference memory, versioned editing and self-coherence. Graded by LLM judge with rubrics. GPT-6.1 Sol 82%
- Multi-IF In use Models follow verifiable instructions over three-turn conversations in eight languages, extending IFEval. Scored by instruction accuracy at each turn. LFM3-1.7B 89.1%
- AdvancedIF In use Models respond to over 1,600 prompts with complex, multi-turn, and system-level instructions. A judge model checks each response against expert-written rubrics.
MAI-Thinking-1 85%
- IFStruct In use Models generate JSON or YAML that must follow a requested schema and phrasing constraints, without constrained decoding. A response passes only if every structural constraint holds. LFM3-1.7B 93.7%