llmboard.aiAI model intelligence
Home

Model Rankings

OverallOpen ModelsAgentCodingReasoningMathKnowledgeInstruction FollowingTextVision
Image GenerationImage Editing
Video GenerationImage to VideoVideo Editing
Text to SpeechSpeech to Text
Embeddings

Efficiency

Chat Token PricingImage PricingVideo PricingAudio Pricing
Chat Speed & LatencyProvider Reliability

Benchmarks

GPQAMMLU-ProAIME 2025SWE-Bench VerifiedMMLUHumanity's Last ExamLiveCodeBenchMATHHumanEvalMMMU-Pro
All Benchmarks

Tools

Model Directory

Scoring & Data

Scoring & Data
1224 models729 benchmarks

Leaderboard Center

Overall RankingCodingCore BenchmarksPrice & ValueRuntime Performance

Modalities

All ModelsImage GenerationImage EditingVideo GenerationImage-to-VideoVideo EditingText-to-SpeechSpeech-to-TextEmbeddings

Data & Methods

Scoring MethodAll Benchmarks
llmboard.aiCopyright 2026 llmboard.ai

Unspecified benchmark

LM Arena Vision Style Control Leaderboard

LM Arena Vision Style Control is a benchmark with a current leaderboard.

Updated Sep 8, 2026

Models100
Model coverage107
MetricArena Rating
EvidenceA

On this page

  • Ranking
  • Highlights
  • Distribution
  • Top models
  • About
  • FAQ

LM Arena Vision Style Control Ranking

Higher arena rating ranks better on this benchmark.

30 of 100 rows
Columns

Show columns

Sort by
Rank
Model
Arena Rating
Percentile
Participants
Votes
Evidence
Evaluated
Rank01ModelANClaude Fable 5AnthropicArena Rating1,313.06 rating (1,304.59 rating - 1,321.52 rating)Percentile100.00%Participants107Votes10,002EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank02ModelANClaude Opus 4.7AnthropicArena Rating1,301.50 rating (1,294.63 rating - 1,308.37 rating)Percentile99.06%Participants107Votes21,137EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank03ModelACQwen3.8 MaxAlibaba Cloud / Qwen TeamArena Rating1,299.71 rating (1,291.40 rating - 1,308.03 rating)Percentile98.11%Participants107Votes7,244EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank04ModelANClaude Opus 4.6AnthropicArena Rating1,298.76 rating (1,292.03 rating - 1,305.49 rating)Percentile97.17%Participants107Votes20,883EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank05ModelMEMuse SparkMetaArena Rating1,293.73 rating (1,284.35 rating - 1,303.11 rating)Percentile96.23%Participants107Votes5,585EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank06ModelMEMuse Spark 1.2MetaArena Rating1,291.76 rating (1,277.01 rating - 1,306.52 rating)Percentile95.28%Participants107Votes1,844EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank07ModelANClaude Opus 5AnthropicArena Rating1,290.35 rating (1,282.12 rating - 1,298.58 rating)Percentile94.34%Participants107Votes8,271EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank08ModelGOGemini 3 ProGoogleArena Rating1,288.59 rating (1,280.99 rating - 1,296.19 rating)Percentile93.40%Participants107Votes13,019EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank09ModelOPGPT-5.5OpenAIArena Rating1,286.10 rating (1,279.42 rating - 1,292.78 rating)Percentile92.45%Participants107Votes21,389EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank10ModelANClaude Opus 4.8AnthropicArena Rating1,285.30 rating (1,277.82 rating - 1,292.79 rating)Percentile91.51%Participants107Votes13,521EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank11ModelGOGemini 3.6 FlashGoogleArena Rating1,284.89 rating (1,274.04 rating - 1,295.74 rating)Percentile90.57%Participants107Votes3,816EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank12ModelGOGemini 3.5 FlashGoogleArena Rating1,284.30 rating (1,275.93 rating - 1,292.66 rating)Percentile89.62%Participants107Votes8,259EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank13ModelOPGPT-5.6 SolOpenAIArena Rating1,282.42 rating (1,273.20 rating - 1,291.64 rating)Percentile88.68%Participants107Votes5,837EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank14ModelXAGrok 4.5xAIArena Rating1,282.18 rating (1,273.30 rating - 1,291.06 rating)Percentile87.74%Participants107Votes6,401EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank15ModelOPGPT-5.4OpenAIArena Rating1,280.73 rating (1,274.13 rating - 1,287.32 rating)Percentile86.79%Participants107Votes23,263EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank16ModelMEMuse Spark 1.1MetaArena Rating1,279.43 rating (1,270.73 rating - 1,288.13 rating)Percentile85.85%Participants107Votes6,769EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank17ModelOPGPT-5.2OpenAIArena Rating1,278.55 rating (1,271.73 rating - 1,285.36 rating)Percentile84.91%Participants107Votes15,446EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank18ModelGOGemini 3.1 ProGoogleArena Rating1,278.40 rating (1,272.72 rating - 1,284.07 rating)Percentile83.96%Participants107Votes39,412EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank19ModelOPGPT-5.5 InstantOpenAIArena Rating1,277.64 rating (1,268.62 rating - 1,286.66 rating)Percentile83.02%Participants107Votes7,225EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank20ModelANClaude Sonnet 4.6AnthropicArena Rating1,275.34 rating (1,268.90 rating - 1,281.78 rating)Percentile82.08%Participants107Votes25,610EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank21ModelZAGLM-5.3-FlashZhipu AIArena Rating1,272.63 rating (1,255.84 rating - 1,289.42 rating)Percentile81.13%Participants107Votes1,389EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank22ModelGOGemini 3 FlashGoogleArena Rating1,272.48 rating (1,267.01 rating - 1,277.94 rating)Percentile80.19%Participants107Votes36,747EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank23ModelANClaude Sonnet 5AnthropicArena Rating1,267.47 rating (1,259.24 rating - 1,275.70 rating)Percentile79.25%Participants107Votes8,522EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank24ModelGOGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogleArena Rating1,266.42 rating (1,255.60 rating - 1,277.24 rating)Percentile78.30%Participants107Votes3,886EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank25ModelACQwen3.7-PlusAlibaba Cloud / Qwen TeamArena Rating1,265.84 rating (1,257.79 rating - 1,273.88 rating)Percentile77.36%Participants107Votes9,132EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank26ModelOPGPT-5.6 TerraOpenAIArena Rating1,265.73 rating (1,256.52 rating - 1,274.94 rating)Percentile76.42%Participants107Votes5,774EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank27ModelMAKimi K2.6Moonshot AIArena Rating1,262.82 rating (1,255.70 rating - 1,269.94 rating)Percentile75.47%Participants107Votes15,378EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank28ModelGOGemma 4 31BGoogleArena Rating1,261.28 rating (1,254.83 rating - 1,267.72 rating)Percentile74.53%Participants107Votes34,348EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank29ModelBYSeed 2.0 ProByteDanceArena Rating1,256.86 rating (1,249.24 rating - 1,264.48 rating)Percentile73.58%Participants107Votes10,297EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026
Rank30ModelXAGrok-4.20 Beta ReasoningxAIArena Rating1,255.85 rating (1,249.47 rating - 1,262.22 rating)Percentile72.64%Participants107Votes25,150EvidenceAEvaluatedAug 27, 2026

LM Arena Vision Style Control Highlights

The leading models and scores on this benchmark.

LM Arena Vision Style Control Score Distribution

A closer view of the leading scores on this benchmark.

LM Arena Vision Style Control

The Top AI Models for LM Arena Vision Style Control

The first five results on this benchmark, with official price and output speed added where the model identity can be matched.

What is LM Arena Vision Style Control?

What LM Arena Vision Style Control measures and how its scores work.

LM Arena Vision Style Control is a current leaderboard.

It reports Arena Rating in rating units.

Scores are shown in rating. This benchmark is verified and has an evidence level of A.

Family
lm-arena-vision-style-control
Modality
Unspecified
Primary category
Unspecified
Score direction
higher
LLMBoard eligible
No
Evaluation key
overall

LM Arena. Benchmark scores retain their original unit. Overall score eligibility is shown separately.

FAQ

Common questions about LM Arena Vision Style Control.

Which model scores highest on LM Arena Vision Style Control?

Claude Fable 5 is currently ranked first with 1,313.06 rating.

What are the top three models on LM Arena Vision Style Control?

The current leaders are Claude Fable 5 (1,313.06 rating), Claude Opus 4.7 (1,301.50 rating), and Qwen3.8 Max (1,299.71 rating).

Which LM Arena Vision Style Control model has the lowest official input price?

GPT-5 nano has the lowest matched official input price at $0.05 input / $0.40 output per 1M tokens.

Which models are fastest among LM Arena Vision Style Control results?

The fastest matched records are Llama 4 Scout (776.10 tok/s via Groq), GPT-5 nano (500.00 tok/s via OpenAI), and GPT-4.1 mini (467.39 tok/s via OpenAI).

Does the highest arena rating result prove overall model quality?

No. This benchmark measures one defined capability or task. The overall LLMBoard score uses a separate aggregation across eligible benchmark evidence.

What does LM Arena Vision Style Control measure?

It reports Arena Rating in rating units.

Is a higher arena rating better?

Yes. Higher values rank better for this benchmark.

How many models are compared?

100 model results are currently shown.

Does this benchmark affect the overall score?

No. This benchmark is shown for reference but does not contribute to the overall score.

Rank #1Claude Fable 51,313.06 rating (1,304.59 rating - 1,321.52 rating)
Rank #2Claude Opus 4.71,301.50 rating (1,294.63 rating - 1,308.37 rating)
Rank #3Qwen3.8 Max1,299.71 rating (1,291.40 rating - 1,308.03 rating)
Rank #4Claude Opus 4.61,298.76 rating (1,292.03 rating - 1,305.49 rating)

Ranking basisThis lm arena vision style control AI model leaderboard uses descending arena rating in the benchmark original unit. The leaderboard ranking keeps matched price and speed data separate from benchmark evidence.

  1. 01
    AN
    Claude Fable 5Anthropic
    Arena Rating
    1,313.06 rating
    Price
    $10 input / $50 output per 1M tokens
    Speed
    Up to 43.18 tok/s via Anthropic

    Strengths

    • Ranks #1 of 107 compared models
    • 100th percentile on this benchmark
    • A evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures LM Arena Vision Style Control, not total model capability
  2. 02
    AN
    Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic
    Arena Rating
    1,301.50 rating
    Price
    $5.0 input / $25 output per 1M tokens
    Speed
    Up to 42.00 tok/s via Vertex AI

    Strengths

    • Ranks #2 of 107 compared models
    • 99th percentile on this benchmark
    • A evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures LM Arena Vision Style Control, not total model capability
  3. 03
    AC
    Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
    Arena Rating
    1,299.71 rating
    Price
    $2.0 input / $6.0 output per 1M tokens
    Speed
    Up to 60.87 tok/s via DeepInfra

    Strengths

    • Ranks #3 of 107 compared models
    • 98th percentile on this benchmark
    • A evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures LM Arena Vision Style Control, not total model capability
  4. 04
    AN
    Anthropic
    Arena Rating
    1,298.76 rating
    Price
    $5.0 input / $25 output per 1M tokens
    Speed
    Up to 123.15 tok/s via Anthropic

    Strengths

    • Ranks #4 of 107 compared models
    • 97th percentile on this benchmark
    • A evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures LM Arena Vision Style Control, not total model capability
  5. 05
    ME
    Meta
    Arena Rating
    1,293.73 rating

    Strengths

    • Ranks #5 of 107 compared models
    • 96th percentile on this benchmark
    • A evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures LM Arena Vision Style Control, not total model capability

Selection summary

Best AI Models for LM Arena Vision Style Control

Claude Fable 5 currently leads LM Arena Vision Style Control with 1,313.06 rating. It is the top model on this specific benchmark, while the best LLM for the broader task should also be checked against other benchmarks, price, and runtime.

Use this leaderboard with the supporting benchmark results and coverage details above. A leaderboard position summarizes the selected ranking signal; it does not replace workload-specific testing.

Qwen3.8 Max
Claude Opus 4.6
Muse Spark
Benchmark rank #1Claude Fable 51,313.06 rating · $10 input / $50 output per 1M tokens
Benchmark rank #2Claude Opus 4.71,301.50 rating · $5.0 input / $25 output per 1M tokens
Benchmark rank #3Qwen3.8 Max1,299.71 rating · $2.0 input / $6.0 output per 1M tokens