Benchmark Almanac

VibeVideoBench

GPT-6 Astra 4.11 leads since Oct 2026 Not in model cards

Agents write code to render a finished video with sound, with no image or video generation model, in their native harness within one hour. Program checks, task rubrics and a judge panel score the result.

239 tasks in English and Chinese across 12 content types. Headline is the mean of five 1 to 5 quality scores, with a missing video counted as 0. Nine agent systems in the first release.

In the authors’ words

Diffusion video models produce striking clips, but they cannot reliably render an exact formula, a correct chart, a rule-consistent game or narration synchronized to on-screen events. A different route is emerging: multimodal agents that write code to render every frame and synthesize every sound. We introduce VibeVideoBench, a benchmark for evaluating agents on code-driven video generation. Its 239 self-contained tasks in English and Chinese span 12 categories, from data stories and music-driven pieces to classroom lessons and paper explainers; each asks an agent, running in its native harness inside a sandbox with no image or video generation model, to deliver a finished MP4 with sound within one hour. Evaluation is hierarchical and evidence-based: program checks of the delivery spec, about 13k task-specific rubric checks traced to the requirements they enforce, and five quality dimensions anchored per task, scored by three VLM judge panels. Across nine frontier agent systems and 2,151 scored rollouts, GPT-6 Astra and Claude Opus 5.5 rank first and second with both the judges and human annotators, and the strongest system satisfies every core requirement on 76.3% of tasks. Delivery is a second axis: counting missing videos as zero changes the ranking, and three quarters of the lost videos are final renders that started too late, ran too slowly or never started, a failure of how agents plan their hour. Agents build their own rendering pipelines and inspect their own frames, yet how much they look does not predict quality. The judges' ranking of the systems closely matches blind human preferences.

Abstract of VibeVideoBench: Evaluating Multimodal Agents on Code-Driven Video Generation (arXiv:2610.35864, CC0)
Made by BUPT + Zhongguancun Academy + Peking University + Jilin University + Kling AI Released Oct 2026 Video generation All tasks public Last model added Sep 2026 Scores refreshed 2 Nov 2026
Level
Expert Specialists with years of training, often over hours of work
Scored
Graded by a model A language model scores each response, usually against a rubric.
Answers
Agent task Many steps in a terminal, browser, desktop, app, game or robot.
9
Models scored on its own leaderboard

GPT-6 Astra leads with 4.11

Best score per model from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on 2 Nov 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best.

  1. 1 GPT-6 Astra 4.11
  2. 2 Claude Opus 5.5 4.07
  3. 3 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 3.91
  4. 4 Claude Sonnet 5.5 3.88
  5. 5 Kimi K3 3.44
  6. 6 GPT-5.6 Sol 3.32
  7. 7 Gemini 4 Argon 3.07
  8. 8 Gemini 3.8 Flash 2.80
  9. 9 GLM-5.3-Flash 2.79
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 GPT-6 Astra 4.11 Codex Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
2 Claude Opus 5.5 4.07 Claude Code Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
3 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 3.91 DSH Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
4 Claude Sonnet 5.5 3.88 Claude Code Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
5 Kimi K3 3.44 Kimi Code Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
6 GPT-5.6 Sol 3.32 Codex Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
7 Gemini 4 Argon 3.07 Antigravity Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
8 Gemini 3.8 Flash 2.80 Antigravity Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
9 GLM-5.3-Flash 2.79 ZCode Aug 2026 Official leaderboard

Number one over time

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

OpenAI
Own leaderboard 1 leader

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
2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50

No lab model card reports it yet

We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.

More in Audio and video

All 168 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%
  • 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%
  • TVBench In use Models answer multiple-choice questions on 10 temporal video tasks, such as action counting and ordering, that static frames cannot solve. Scored by accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 81.9%