Swipe for more top models
<report>
Kling
75.51
Megaton Index
The 0–100 weighted total across 15 v-benchmark v2 dimensions, calculated from each published category and technical score at its locked weight.
View methodology →/ 100
Prompt Adherence20%84.68C02Scene Consistency10%90.15C03Physics20%70.00C04Human Fidelity10%90.00C052D Animation Craft & Artistry7.5%59.17C063D Animation Craft & Artistry7.5%58.00C07Cinematography Craft & Artistry2.5%67.14C08Taste & Art Direction6.5%65.83C09Animal & Creature Fidelity1.5%80.00C10Object & Product Fidelity1.5%89.72C11Causal & Semantic Coherence7.5%76.36C12Text Fidelity1.5%24.26C13Character Performance & Acting1.5%78.00C15Quality + Reliability2%81.36Get the complete Kling 3 Pro category evidence, comparison videos, and version analysis.
If you work at Kling and want full access to the evaluation, please reach out directly to receive a full complimentary report.This Video
100.0This Video · Assessment
This video fulfills its explicit, observable instructions with near-complete consistency.
This Category
84.760 videos were rated for this category
This Category · Assessment
Prompt requirements are fulfilled reliably across the set, with only isolated misses or ambiguities.
Models that scored similarly on this category
This Video
96.5This Video · Assessment
This video maintains subjects, objects, spatial relationships, environment, and lighting over time with near-complete consistency.
This Category
90.260 videos were rated for this category
This Category · Assessment
Subjects, objects, spatial relationships, environment, and lighting remain coherent across nearly all evaluated videos.
Models that scored similarly on this category
This Video
50.0This Video · Assessment
The intended physical event is recognizable, but repeated important defects leave it only partly convincing.
This Category
70.017 videos were rated for this category
This Category · Assessment
Motion and interaction are convincing overall, with recurring but non-disruptive physical anomalies.
Models that scored similarly on this category
This Video
100.0This Video · Assessment
Fully convincing within the requested style, with no meaningful uncanny or anatomical defects.
This Category
90.027 videos were rated for this category
This Category · Assessment
Human anatomy, identity, surfaces, and motion remain convincing across nearly all evaluated videos.
Models that scored similarly on this category
This Video
80.0This Video · Assessment
Technically excellent and fully professional, but more conventional or less expressive than the highest tier.
This Category
59.212 videos were rated for this category
This Category · Assessment
The requested medium remains recognizable, but technical and expressive quality is uneven across the set.
Models that scored similarly on this category
This Video
50.0This Video · Assessment
The intended 3D animation is recognizable, but repeated technical or expressive defects leave it only partly convincing.
This Category
58.05 videos were rated for this category
This Category · Assessment
The intended 3D animation remains recognizable, but technical and expressive quality is uneven.
Models that scored similarly on this category
This Video
60.0This Video · Assessment
Coherent and competent but synthetic, mechanical, or visually underdeveloped.
This Category
67.17 videos were rated for this category
This Category · Assessment
Cinematography is generally coherent and capable, but mechanical or underdeveloped visual choices recur.
Models that scored similarly on this category
This Video
60.0This Video · Assessment
Competent but visibly reliant on familiar AI aesthetics or underdeveloped art direction.
This Category
65.860 videos were rated for this category
This Category · Assessment
Art direction is generally capable, but generic, unresolved, or less-confident choices recur.
Models that scored similarly on this category
This Video
60.0This Video · Assessment
Coherent but noticeably synthetic, anatomically strained, or behaviorally unnatural.
This Category
80.07 videos were rated for this category
This Category · Assessment
Animal and creature fidelity is highly convincing across the set, with only small localized defects.
Models that scored similarly on this category
This Video
100.0This Video · Assessment
This video preserves the requested objects’ identity, structure, materials, details, motion, and interactions with near-complete consistency.
This Category
89.78 videos were rated for this category
This Category · Assessment
Object and product fidelity is highly reliable, with only isolated detail or material failures.
Models that scored similarly on this category
This Video
70.0This Video · Assessment
The event remains understandable, but noticeable contradictions appear.
This Category
76.411 videos were rated for this category
This Category · Assessment
Events remain clear overall, though recurring logical irregularities are visible but bounded.
Models that scored similarly on this category
This Video
100.0This Video · Assessment
This video preserves requested text content, typography, placement, attachment, legibility, and temporal stability with near-complete consistency.
This Category
24.37 videos were rated for this category
This Category · Assessment
Severe spelling, legibility, placement, attachment, or temporal failures dominate much of the set.
This Video
80.0This Video · Assessment
Professional, clear, and convincing, but more conventional or less nuanced.
This Category
78.021 videos were rated for this category
This Category · Assessment
Performances are professional and convincing overall, though recurring choices are more conventional or less nuanced.
Models that scored similarly on this category
<comparisons>
megaton.aimegaton.aimegaton.aimegaton.aimegaton.aimegaton.aimegaton.aimegaton.aimegaton.aimegaton.aimegaton.aimegaton.aimegaton.aimegaton.aimegaton.aiMeasuring video model quality and performance
Scores are from the active Megaton v-benchmark v2.0 publication. See how our scores are calculated in our Methodology.
The Megaton Index is the published 0–100 weighted summary for v-benchmark v2. This public report shows the model's Index and category scores; the full calibration evidence, decision records, and scoring implementation are reserved for the full report.
Read the full methodology →
