Head to head
Esc

Models · slot A

to navigate to pick

FLUX.1 [dev] Black Forest Labs FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] Black Forest Labs

Settled by community votes across 13 shared challenges, with an AI judge weighing in on each.

FLUX.1 [dev]

24.6 arena score

#16 of 62 in Text-to-Image

Skill signature · Text-to-Image

FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

20.3 arena score

#41 of 62 in Text-to-Image

Vote tally

Where the votes landed

FLUX.1 [dev]

0.0%

win rate

Ties

0.0%

FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

100.0%

win rate

0.0% 0.0% ties 100.0%
Shared challenges 13

Challenge by challenge

The strongest take from each model on every shared challenge, with the AI judge's read.

Geometric Composition

Text-to-Image

“A glass cube on a wooden table. Inside the cube is a small blue sphere. On top of the cube sits a red book. A green plant is behind the cube, partially visible through the glass. Soft window light from the left.”

FLUX.1 [dev]
FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 [dev]

  • + Excellent depiction of thick glass with realistic refractions.
  • + Soft lighting feels natural and follows the direction specified.
  • + High-quality textures on the leather-style book cover.
  • The glass object is a tall rectangle rather than a cube.
  • The blue sphere appears to be floating unnaturally or fused with a glass pane.

FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

  • + Perfectly adheres to the 'cube' shape mentioned in the prompt.
  • + Detailed wood grain on the table.
  • + Strong composition that clearly shows all elements, including the plant behind the glass.
  • The blue sphere has a fuzzy, felt-like texture which might be an unusual interpretation of 'sphere' in a glass display.
  • The sphere appears to be levitating inside the cube without visible support.

Verdict: While both models followed the prompt instructions well, FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] is the winner for correctly rendering the object as a cube, whereas FLUX.1 [dev] rendered a vertical rectangular prism. FLUX.1 [dev] had more realistic glass refractions, but FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] provided a more accurate and better-composed layout of the scene elements.

Candid Street Photography

Text-to-Image

“A candid street photo of an elderly Japanese man repairing a red bicycle in light rain, reflections on wet pavement, shallow depth of field, 50mm lens, natural skin texture, imperfect framing, motion blur from passing cars, cinematic but realistic, no stylization.”

FLUX.1 [dev]
FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 [dev]

  • + Excellent full-body composition that captures the scale of the street and the red bicycle.
  • + Strong adherence to the 'motion blur from passing cars' prompt element.
  • + Very realistic skin textures and wet pavement reflections.
  • The framing feels a bit too balanced for 'imperfect framing'.
  • The man appears more focused on holding the bike than actively 'repairing' it.

FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

  • + Successfully achieves the 'imperfect framing' request with a tighter, slightly offset crop.
  • + Natural, weathered skin texture on the face and arms is highly realistic.
  • + The color grading feels more like a raw street photo with no stylization.
  • Misses the 'motion blur from passing cars' requirement, as the background cars appear static.
  • The bicycle is cut off significantly, losing some of the red color presence requested.

Verdict: FLUX.1 [dev] produced a more visually complete image with superior lighting and better adherence to the motion blur request, making it feel more cinematic. However, FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] captured the 'candid' and 'imperfect framing' aspects of the prompt more effectively, resulting in a more believable street photography aesthetic. FLUX.1 [dev] is the likely winner for successfully incorporating almost every complex prompt instruction into a coherent scene.

Fantasy Warrior

Text-to-Image

“Close portrait of a battle-worn paladin in ornate engraved plate armor, hair braided with small beads, faint scars and dirt on the skin, warm torchlight reflecting off metal, shallow depth of field, bokeh sparks, lifelike eyes, highly detailed texture on leather straps and cloth underlayer.”

FLUX.1 [dev]
FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 [dev]

  • + Excellent high-contrast lighting with clear bokeh sparks
  • + High skin texture detail including realistic freckles and pores
  • Missed the request for 'braided with small beads'
  • The 'battle-worn' aesthetic is very clean, looking more like a fashion shoot than a paladin
  • Armor engraving is less distinct and lacks the requested fine leather strap detail

FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

  • + Perfect adherence to specific details like the hair beads, leather straps, and cloth underlayer
  • + Convincing 'battle-worn' feel with realistic scars and authentic metal textures
  • + Superior engraving detail on the pauldrons
  • Lighting is slightly flatter compared to the dramatic lighting in Image A
  • Background bokeh is a bit more muted

Verdict: While both models produced high-quality portraits, FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] followed the prompt much more accurately, including specific elements like the hair beads and detailed leather straps that FLUX.1 [dev] omitted. FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] also captured the 'battle-worn' theme more effectively, whereas FLUX.1 [dev] created a more stylized, clean-faced image.

Modern Clean Menu

Text-to-Image

“Modern minimalist restaurant menu design, white background with colorful food photos in grid, sections for appetizers/pizza/mains, bold sans-serif fonts, vibrant accents, clean professional layout for casual dining.”

FLUX.1 [dev]
FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 [dev]

  • + Elegant and professional aesthetic suitable for casual to fine dining.
  • + Excellent utilization of white space and minimalist graphic elements.
  • + Clean typography that mimics a realistic menu structure.
  • Missed the 'Pizza' specific section requested in the prompt.
  • Food photos are clustered at the corners rather than in a grid.

FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

  • + Followed the section requirements perfectly including Appetizers, Pizza, and Mains.
  • + Closer adherence to the 'grid' layout for food photos.
  • + Strong, bold sans-serif fonts as requested.
  • Text contains several spelling errors and nonsensical words.
  • Composition feels slightly cramped with inconsistent margins.
  • Food descriptions are repetitive and messy.

Verdict: FLUX.1 [dev] produced a much more realistic and professionally designed document, though it failed to include the specific 'Pizza' section requested. FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] followed the content instructions more closely by including all three requested sections and a grid-like photo layout, but its visual design is less refined and the text quality is lower. Overall, FLUX.1 [dev] is preferred for its superior layout and design quality.

Magic Burger Explosion: Fiery Photorealism Challenge

Text-to-Image

“Ad for 'Magic Burger'. Dynamic, exploded burger with all components (bun, patty, cheese, lettuce, tomato, sauce) suspended in mid-air. Emphasize photorealistic detail and a sense of motion. Dark, fiery background with glowing embers. Integrate text: 'MAGIC BURGER' as a prominent title, 'LIMITED TIME ONLY' as a secondary message, and '€6.99' in a starburst, all rendered with a fiery, glowing effect.”

FLUX.1 [dev]
FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]
0% wins 0% ties 100% wins

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 [dev]

  • + Clean execution of the 'exploded' burger concept with distinct layers
  • + High-quality rendering of the food textures and ingredients
  • Completely failed to include the primary 'MAGIC BURGER' title text
  • Missing the starburst element and fiery glowing effect for the text
  • Composition feels a bit empty with the small text at the bottom

FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

  • + Successfully included all requested text as prominent, glowing elements
  • + Captures the 'fiery' aesthetic and sense of motion with embers and sparks much better
  • + Excellent layout that feels like a complete advertisement
  • The burger is not truly 'exploded' with suspended components as requested, appearing mostly assembled
  • Duplicated the price tag in two different locations

Verdict: FLUX.1 [dev] produced a better 'exploded burger' visual but failed nearly all text-related prompt instructions, including missing the main title. FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] followed the complex text requirements perfectly and created a much more dynamic, high-energy advertisement, even though the burger itself is less separated than requested.

Chalkboard Menu

Text-to-Image

“Handwritten-style chalkboard menu in a cozy café, all text rendered in the exact same realistic chalk handwriting style with natural variations in letter size, slight slant, and chalk texture — no printed or digital fonts anywhere on the board. Title at the top in elegant cursive chalk handwriting: ‘TODAY’S SPECIALS – APRIL 30, 2026’. Below it, three menu items also in the same handwritten chalk style: ‘Truffle Mushroom Risotto – $24’, ‘Grilled Octopus with Lemon & Herbs – $28’, ‘Brown Butter Chocolate Chip Cookies – $9’. At the very bottom, smaller text in the identical handwritten chalk style (slightly smaller but still clearly legible with the same handwriting characteristics): ‘All items made fresh daily • Ask about our gluten-free options’. Warm ambient café lighting, visible chalk dust and smudges, realistic handwriting imperfections, no clean printed text anywhere.”

FLUX.1 [dev]
FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 [dev]

  • + Excellent layout with aesthetic variation in font styles.
  • + Successfully completed the truncated 'Brown But...' request into full logical items.
  • + Includes a realistic wooden board frame with depth.
  • The text 'fresh dhish daily' includes a spelling error.
  • The handwriting looks slightly more like a digital brush than actual chalk on stone.

FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

  • + Remarkably realistic chalk texture with visible grain and dusty edges.
  • + Perfect spelling on all menu items including the added footer.
  • + Handwriting captures a convincing amateur natural slant and variation.
  • The cursive requested for the title is very subtle and looks more like standard print.
  • The spacing on the bottom line 'four' is slightly awkward.

Verdict: Both models handled the truncated prompt intelligently, completing the 'Brown Butter Chocolate Chip Cookies' item. FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] is the winner because its rendering of chalk texture is significantly more realistic, whereas FLUX.1 [dev] looks like a digital font overlay. FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] also managed to avoid the spelling errors present in the other model.

The Reversed Rodeo

Text-to-Image

“Horse riding astronaut in space — horse on top, not vice versa. Surreal, highly detailed, cinematic.”

FLUX.1 [dev]
FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 [dev]

  • + High visual quality and cinematic lighting
  • + Clean, professional-looking rendering of the horse and astronaut
  • Failed to follow the specific instruction of having the horse on top of the astronaut
  • Common, cliché interpretation of the prompt

FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

  • + Successfully followed the difficult spatial instruction of having the horse on top
  • + Interesting surreal interpretation with a smaller astronaut on top of the horse's back
  • + Creative composition that matches the text request accurately
  • The astronaut's feet are rendered as hooves, which is a logic error
  • Some anatomical oddities with the horse's front legs

Verdict: FLUX.1 [dev] produced a high-quality but generic image that completely ignored the negative constraint/spatial instruction of 'horse on top'. FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] successfully interpreted the unusual prompt, placing the horse on top of the astronaut, making it the clear winner for prompt adherence despite some minor anatomical artifacts.

The Capybara Taxi Driver

Text-to-Image

“Photorealistic scene inside a yellow New York taxi at night. A capybara is driving, wearing a yellow taxi driver cap and a dark jacket. It has a calm, professional expression and both front paws on the steering wheel. In the back seat sits a human businesswoman in a coat, looking at her phone with a completely normal, bored expression (as if this is just another normal ride). Through the windows you can see the streets of Manhattan at night with blurred lights. Realistic taxi interior, photorealistic, detailed fur and fabric, 35mm lens, night lighting with reflections, shallow depth of field.”

FLUX.1 [dev]
FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 [dev]

  • + Excellent character placement and framing from outside the windshield
  • + Very high quality rendering of the capybara's fur and the taxi hat
  • + Accurately shows the businesswoman in the back seat looking at her phone
  • The woman appears to be sitting in the front passenger seat rather than the back seat
  • The capybara's paw/claw anatomy looks a bit distorted on the wheel

FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

  • + Correctly places the businesswoman in the back seat as requested
  • + More realistic interior lighting and seatbelt detail
  • + Consistent capybara anatomy with a clear professional expression
  • The woman is on a phone call instead of looking at her phone screen as requested
  • The composition is a bit tighter, making the city environment less visible

Verdict: Both models followed many aspects of the complex prompt, but FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] correctly placed the passenger in the back seat, whereas FLUX.1 [dev] placed her in the front next to the driver. FLUX.1 [dev] followed the phone interaction prompt better, but the spatial accuracy of FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] makes it a more coherent scene overall.

The Halloween Invitation

Text-to-Image

“Vintage gothic Halloween party invitation. Dark parchment poster, spooky border with webs and thorns, central glowing jack-o-lantern, bats, twisted trees, moody night sky. Add elegant gothic title text saying "Halloween Party Invitation", a small scroll banner saying "You are invited to a night of frights", and event details at the bottom: Date: 30.10.2026 Time: 7pm Location: The Arches, NYC Spooky but polished, cinematic lighting, square format.”

FLUX.1 [dev]
FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 [dev]

  • + Excellent thorn border that frames the central artwork well
  • + Captures the 'spooky but polished' request with clean illustrative style
  • + Correct hierarchy of date and location information at the bottom
  • Major spelling errors in the title text ('Falloween Rantcl')
  • Included redundant '7pm, 7pm' text in the time section
  • Parchment texture is missing, appearing more as a modern graphic design

FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

  • + Excellent gothic typography for the main title with perfect spelling
  • + Successfully incorporates both webs and thorns into a very detailed border
  • + Atmospheric vintage parchment texture captures the requested aesthetic perfectly
  • Included gibberish text in the event details section ('Your: Vorkleat: Iight & Spans')
  • The small scroll banner text is slightly uneven
  • The pumpkin is smaller and has less visual impact compared to the first model

Verdict: FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] is the clear winner for its superior text rendering of the main title and its deep adherence to the 'vintage gothic parchment' aesthetic. While FLUX.1 [dev] produced a bolder central illustration, it failed significantly on the primary title text and lacked the requested texture, whereas Kontext [pro] successfully balanced complex borders, textures, and nearly all text elements.

Isometric Miniature Diorama Scenes

Text-to-Image

“Create a clear, 45° top-down isometric miniature 3D cartoon scene of Japan's signature dish: sushi, with soft refined textures, realistic PBR materials, gentle lighting, on a small raised diorama base with minimal garnish and plate. Solid light blue background. At top-center: 'JAPAN' in large bold text, 'SUSHI' below it, small flag icon. Perfectly centered, ultra-clean, high-clarity, square format.”

FLUX.1 [dev]
FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 [dev]

  • + Excellent soft lighting and realistic PBR textures on the sushi.
  • + Shows a beautiful miniature diorama with multiple sushi pieces.
  • Text rendering is hallucinated and incorrect ('SUSH CATON' and strange symbols).
  • Background is slightly cluttered with extra floral elements not requested.

FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

  • + Perfect adherence to text labels, correctly rendering 'JAPAN' and 'SUSHI'.
  • + Clean, bold 3D cartoon aesthetic that fits the 'miniature' prompt well.
  • + Correct execution of the flag icon and solid blue background.
  • The rice texture looks more like large pearls/bubbles than sushi rice.
  • Only shows a single sushi piece instead of a variety or set.

Verdict: While FLUX.1 [dev] has superior lighting and realistic textures, it fails significantly on the text rendering and includes unnecessary elements. FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] captures the prompt's layout, text requirements, and 'cartoon' style perfectly, making it the better choice for this specific graphic design task.

Adorable Baby Animals in Sunny Meadow

Text-to-Image

“Hyper-photorealistic scene of fluffy baby animals—a golden retriever puppy, tabby kitten, baby bunny, and red fox kit—with big expressive eyes and ultra-detailed soft fur, playfully chasing butterflies and tumbling together in a lush wildflower meadow, warm golden sunrise light with god rays and dew sparkles, joyful wholesome vibe, 8K masterpiece.”

FLUX.1 [dev]
FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 [dev]

  • + Successfully includes the four distinct animal species asked for in the prompt.
  • + Strong, clear 'god rays' and backlighting that creates a dreamy atmosphere.
  • + Clean composition with characters standing out from the background.
  • Has a very stylized, '3D animation' look that fails the 'hyper-photorealistic' part of the prompt.
  • Anatomy is simplified and cartoon-like, especially on the bunny and fox.
  • The animals are standing in a stiff row rather than tumbling or playing.

FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

  • + Achieves a much higher level of photorealism with realistic fur textures and eye reflections.
  • + Excellent integration of the animals into the lush wildflower meadow with believable lighting.
  • + Captures a more joyful, candid expression in the animals' faces.
  • Failed to include the four distinct species, showing two cats instead of a bunny and a kitten.
  • The foxes and cats look very similar in their facial structures.
  • Includes floating artifacts/sparkles that look a bit unnatural.

Verdict: FLUX.1 [dev] followed the species list much better by including a distinct dog, cat, fox, and bunny, but the style is far too cartoonish for a 'hyper-photorealistic' prompt. FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] creates a stunningly beautiful and realistic image, though it loses points for prompt adherence by replacing the bunny with a second kitten. FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] is the preferred winner for its superior aesthetic quality and texture despite the missing species.

Vintage Cafe Logo

Text-to-Image

“Vintage minimalist restaurant logo for "Caffè Florian", retro cloche dome with steam and "Est. 1720" banner, classic typography, warm brown and cream tones, subtle texture on light background, vector emblem style.”

FLUX.1 [dev]
FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 [dev]

  • + Excellent vector aesthetic and visual balance
  • + Elegant brush-style typography
  • + Accurate color scheme and steam detail
  • Significant spelling errors in the brand name and 'Restaurant'
  • Included extra random numbers that weren't in the prompt

FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

  • + Perfectly spelled brand name 'Caffè Florian'
  • + Strong adherence to the 'Est. 1720' banner requirement
  • + Nice paper-like texture and clean minimalist layout
  • Slight misspelling of 'EST.' inside the banner as 'EEST.'
  • The cloche dome illustration is slightly less refined compared to the other model

Verdict: FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] is the clear winner because it correctly spelled the primary brand name 'Caffè Florian', whereas FLUX.1 [dev] produced high-quality visuals but failed significantly on text accuracy. While FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] had a small typo in the banner, its overall adherence to the specific text and minimalist style makes it a more usable logo.

Apollo 11: Journey to Tranquility

Text-to-Image

“Create a clean, modern vector infographic poster about the Apollo 11 mission. NASA-inspired palette (navy, white, muted red, light gray). Flat-vector style, crisp lines, consistent iconography, subtle gradients only. Steps (stop at landing): 1. Launch (Saturn Vicon) 2. Earth Orbit (Earth + orbit ring icon) 3. Translunar (trajectory arc icon) 4. Lunar Orbit (Moon + orbit ring icon) 5. Descent (lunar module descending icon) 6. Landing (lunar module on the surface icon) Small supporting elements (minimal text): • Crew strip: three silhouette icons with only last names: Armstrong, Aldrin, Collins. • Landing site marker: Moon pin labeled "Tranquility" only. Layout constraints: generous margins, large readable labels, clean background with subtle stars. Vector-only, print-poster look, high resolution.”

FLUX.1 [dev]
FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 [dev]

  • + Excellent adherence to the requested flat-vector infographic style
  • + Clean, professional layout with consistent iconography and color palette
  • + Accurately represents the requested mission steps in a logical flow
  • Text is mostly illegible or nonsensical gibberish
  • Includes random planets with rings that don't belong in a Moon mission infographic

FLUX.1 Kontext [pro]

  • + Stronger text rendering for labels like 'Apollo 11' and 'Tranquility'
  • + Captures the NASA-inspired color palette effectively
  • + Creative vertical composition with the Saturn V at the center
  • Logic is confusing as it includes Saturn in an Apollo mission graphic
  • Fails to clearly represent the specific numbered steps requested (1-6)
  • Labeling is nonsensical, such as labeling Earth as '4' or having 'Collins' on a trajectory line

Verdict: FLUX.1 [dev] is the clear winner for its superior adherence to the 'infographic' style requested, featuring much cleaner vector aesthetics and a logical flow of icons. While FLUX.1 Kontext [pro] has better text rendering, its factual logic is broken by the inclusion of the planet Saturn and a disjointed layout that fails to follow the requested 6-step sequence.

Next steps

Explore each model