Standardized benchmarks for AI models are largely irrelevant for business applications. Companies need to create their own evaluation systems tailored to their specific industry, workflows, and use cases to accurately assess which new model provides a tangible benefit and ROI.
Related Insights
Companies feel immense pressure to integrate AI to stay competitive, leading to massive spending. However, this rush means they lack the infrastructure to measure ROI, creating a paradox of anxious investment without clear proof of value.
The key for enterprises isn't integrating general AI like ChatGPT but creating "proprietary intelligence." This involves fine-tuning smaller, custom models on their unique internal data and workflows, creating a competitive moat that off-the-shelf solutions cannot replicate.
Public leaderboards like LM Arena are becoming unreliable proxies for model performance. Teams implicitly or explicitly "benchmark" by optimizing for specific test sets. The superior strategy is to focus on internal, proprietary evaluation metrics and use public benchmarks only as a final, confirmatory check, not as a primary development target.
Data from RAMP indicates enterprise AI adoption has stalled at 45%, with 55% of businesses not paying for AI. This suggests that simply making models smarter isn't driving growth. The next adoption wave requires AI to become more practically useful and demonstrate clear business value, rather than just offering incremental intelligence gains.
AI evaluation shouldn't be confined to engineering silos. Subject matter experts (SMEs) and business users hold the critical domain knowledge to assess what's "good." Providing them with GUI-based tools, like an "eval studio," is crucial for continuous improvement and building trustworthy enterprise AI.
The primary bottleneck in improving AI is no longer data or compute, but the creation of 'evals'—tests that measure a model's capabilities. These evals act as product requirement documents (PRDs) for researchers, defining what success looks like and guiding the training process.
Traditional AI benchmarks are seen as increasingly incremental and less interesting. The new frontier for evaluating a model's true capability lies in applied, complex tasks that mimic real-world interaction, such as building in Minecraft (MC Bench) or managing a simulated business (VendingBench), which are more revealing of raw intelligence.
OpenAI's new GDP-val benchmark evaluates models on complex, real-world knowledge work tasks, not abstract IQ tests. This pivot signifies that the true measure of AI progress is now its ability to perform economically valuable human jobs, making performance metrics directly comparable to professional output.
Standardized AI benchmarks are saturated and becoming less relevant for real-world use cases. The true measure of a model's improvement is now found in custom, internal evaluations (evals) created by application-layer companies. Progress for a legal AI tool, for example, is a more meaningful indicator than a generic test score.
Instead of waiting for external reports, companies should develop their own AI model evaluations. By defining key tasks for specific roles and testing new models against them with standard prompts, businesses can create a relevant, internal benchmark.
