Benchmark Almanac

EvalCrafter

Gen2 (2023.12) 254.0 tops its leaderboard
Not in model cards

Text-to-video models generate clips for 700 prompts drawn from real user requests. The clips are scored with 17 automatic metrics for visual quality, content quality, motion and text alignment. Weights fitted to human ratings combine the metrics into one score.

CVPR 2024. Many of the 17 metrics rely on vision models, and the human-alignment weights come from the makers' own user study. About 200 GitHub stars.

Released
October 2023
Kind
Video generation
Level
Everyday
Scored
Graded by a model
Answers
Open-ended
Tasks
All public

In the authors’ words

The vision and language generative models have been overgrown in recent years. For video generation, various open-sourced models and public-available services have been developed to generate high-quality videos. However, these methods often use a few metrics, e.g., FVD or IS, to evaluate the performance. We argue that it is hard to judge the large conditional generative models from the simple metrics since these models are often trained on very large datasets with multi-aspect abilities. Thus, we propose a novel framework and pipeline for exhaustively evaluating the performance of the generated videos. Our approach involves generating a diverse and comprehensive list of 700 prompts for text-to-video generation, which is based on an analysis of real-world user data and generated with the assistance of a large language model. Then, we evaluate the state-of-the-art video generative models on our carefully designed benchmark, in terms of visual qualities, content qualities, motion qualities, and text-video alignment with 17 well-selected objective metrics. To obtain the final leaderboard of the models, we further fit a series of coefficients to align the objective metrics to the users' opinions. Based on the proposed human alignment method, our final score shows a higher correlation than simply averaging the metrics, showing the effectiveness of the proposed evaluation method.

Abstract of EvalCrafter: Benchmarking and Evaluating Large Video Generation Models (arXiv:2310.11440, CC0)
14
Entries on its own leaderboard, 0 models we track

Gen2 (2023.12) tops the leaderboard with 254.0

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.

  1. 1 Gen2 (2023.12) 254.0
  2. 2 PikaLab V1.0 (2023.12) 250.0
  3. 3 Gen2 (2023.09) 244.0
  4. 4 VideoCrafter2 (2024.01) 243.0
  5. 5 LaVie-Interpolation (2023.09) 241.0
  6. 6 MoonValley (2024.01) 241.0
  7. 7 PikaLab (2023.10) 238.0
  8. 8 Hotshot-XL (2023.10) 235.0
  9. 9 LaVie-Base (2023.09) 234.0
  10. 10 VideoCrafter1 (2023.10) 232.0
  11. 11 Show-1 (2023.10) 229.0
  12. 12 VideoCrafter V0.9 (Floor33) (2023.08) 220.0
  13. 13 Modelscope-XL (2023.08) 218.0
  14. 14 Zeroscope (2023.06) 217.0

Source: Official EvalCrafter leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Gen2 (2023.12) 254.0 Official leaderboard
2 PikaLab V1.0 (2023.12) 250.0 Official leaderboard
3 Gen2 (2023.09) 244.0 Official leaderboard
4 VideoCrafter2 (2024.01) 243.0 Official leaderboard
5 LaVie-Interpolation (2023.09) 241.0 Official leaderboard
6 MoonValley (2024.01) 241.0 Official leaderboard
7 PikaLab (2023.10) 238.0 Official leaderboard
8 Hotshot-XL (2023.10) 235.0 Official leaderboard
9 LaVie-Base (2023.09) 234.0 Official leaderboard
10 VideoCrafter1 (2023.10) 232.0 Official leaderboard
11 Show-1 (2023.10) 229.0 Official leaderboard
12 VideoCrafter V0.9 (Floor33) (2023.08) 220.0 Official leaderboard
13 Modelscope-XL (2023.08) 218.0 Official leaderboard
14 Zeroscope (2023.06) 217.0 Official 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 Audio and video

All 232 in Audio and video
  • Video-MMMU In use 300 expert-level lecture videos with questions testing perception, comprehension and adaptation of knowledge. Accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 88.7%
  • LVBench In use Hours-long video understanding with multiple-choice questions on reasoning, grounding and summarization. Gemini 4 Argon 91.7%
  • MMVU In use 3,000 expert-annotated questions on videos across 27 disciplines. Multiple-choice and open-ended accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 82.4%
  • MLVU In use Multi-task long video understanding (minutes to hours) with multiple-choice and generation tasks. Accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 90.8%
  • FLEURS In use Models transcribe read speech in 102 languages built from FLoRes-101 sentences. Model cards usually report word error rate, so lower scores are better. Phi-4-multimodal 4.00%
  • VoiceBench In use Spoken instructions with speaker, environment and content variation. Voice assistant responses scored by GPT judge or rules. Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus 93.1%