| 0 |
| 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Paid | Free |
| Capabilities | 5 decomposed | 9 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Implements a competitive ranking system that evaluates multiple generative image models (e.g., DALL-E, Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, etc.) against identical prompts through crowdsourced or automated preference voting. The arena architecture collects user votes on side-by-side image outputs, aggregates preference signals, and maintains a dynamic leaderboard that ranks models by win-rate and Elo-style scoring. This enables real-time performance tracking across model versions and providers without requiring direct model access or inference infrastructure.
Unique: Operates as a public, crowdsourced arena rather than a closed benchmark — continuously updates rankings based on real user preferences across diverse prompts, enabling dynamic model comparison without requiring researchers to maintain proprietary evaluation infrastructure. Uses Elo-style scoring adapted for multi-way comparisons rather than traditional pairwise metrics.
vs alternatives: More transparent and community-driven than proprietary model benchmarks (e.g., OpenAI's internal evals), and captures real-world user preferences rather than narrow academic metrics, though less rigorous than controlled scientific evaluation frameworks.
Provides a unified interface to submit text prompts and receive generated images from multiple underlying generative models (DALL-E, Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, etc.) through fal.ai's inference orchestration layer. The system routes requests to appropriate model endpoints, handles authentication/API key management for each provider, and returns standardized image outputs. This abstracts away provider-specific API differences and enables easy model switching without client-side code changes.
Unique: Implements provider-agnostic image generation through a unified API that abstracts authentication, request formatting, and response normalization across heterogeneous model endpoints. Uses request routing logic to map model selection to appropriate backend infrastructure, enabling seamless provider switching without application code changes.
vs alternatives: Simpler than building custom multi-provider abstraction layers, and more flexible than single-provider SDKs, though adds latency and cost overhead compared to direct API calls to a single provider.
Continuously ingests user preference votes on image pairs, applies Elo-style ranking algorithms to update model scores, and publishes live leaderboard updates to the web interface with minimal latency. The system maintains vote history, handles tie-breaking logic, and recomputes rankings incrementally as new votes arrive rather than batch-processing, enabling real-time score visibility. Vote data is persisted and queryable for historical analysis and trend detection.
Unique: Implements incremental Elo-style ranking updates as votes arrive in real-time, rather than batch-recomputing scores periodically. Uses WebSocket or Server-Sent Events to push leaderboard changes to clients, enabling live score visibility without polling. Maintains full vote history for reproducibility and audit trails.
vs alternatives: More responsive than batch-updated leaderboards (e.g., daily snapshots), and more transparent than proprietary model rankings that hide voting methodology. However, lacks statistical rigor of peer-reviewed benchmarks that use controlled evaluation protocols.
Maintains a curated set of standardized prompts across diverse categories (e.g., portraits, landscapes, abstract art, text rendering, specific objects) that are used consistently across all model evaluations in the arena. These prompts are designed to probe different model capabilities and reduce variance from prompt engineering. The system may include prompt templates, difficulty ratings, and category tags to enable stratified analysis of model performance across capability dimensions.
Unique: Curates a community-validated prompt set that balances breadth (covering diverse image generation tasks) with depth (multiple prompts per category to reduce noise). Prompts are tagged with difficulty and capability dimensions, enabling stratified analysis rather than single aggregate scores.
vs alternatives: More representative of diverse use cases than academic benchmarks (which focus on narrow metrics), and more stable than user-submitted prompts (which vary in quality and intent). However, less comprehensive than proprietary model evaluation suites that test thousands of edge cases.
Collects and aggregates inference latency, API response times, and cost-per-image metrics across different generative image models and providers. The system tracks these metrics alongside quality rankings, enabling users to make cost-benefit tradeoffs when selecting models. Latency data is collected from actual inference requests, and cost data is sourced from provider pricing APIs or manual configuration. Results are displayed as a multi-dimensional leaderboard that can be sorted by quality, speed, or cost.
Unique: Integrates quality rankings with operational metrics (latency, cost) in a single multi-dimensional leaderboard, enabling users to optimize for their specific constraints rather than quality alone. Uses real inference data to measure latency rather than synthetic benchmarks, capturing actual network and provider variability.
vs alternatives: More practical than quality-only rankings for production use cases, and more transparent than provider-published benchmarks (which may be self-serving). However, less rigorous than controlled performance testing in isolated environments.
Executes SQL queries against Supabase PostgreSQL instances through the Model Context Protocol, translating natural language or structured query requests into parameterized SQL statements. Uses MCP's tool-calling interface to expose database operations as callable functions with schema validation, enabling LLM agents to perform CRUD operations, joins, and aggregations with automatic connection pooling and credential management through Supabase client SDK.
Unique: Exposes Supabase PostgreSQL as MCP tools with automatic credential injection from Supabase client SDK, eliminating manual connection string management and enabling seamless LLM-to-database queries within Claude or compatible agents
vs alternatives: Tighter integration than generic SQL MCP servers because it leverages Supabase's built-in authentication and connection pooling rather than requiring separate database credential configuration
Exposes Supabase Auth session state and user metadata through MCP tools, allowing agents to inspect current authentication context, retrieve user profiles, and trigger auth-related operations. Integrates with Supabase's JWT-based auth system to validate sessions and access user claims without re-authenticating, using the Supabase client's built-in session management.
Unique: Integrates Supabase's JWT-based auth system directly into MCP tool interface, allowing agents to inspect and act on auth state without managing separate credential stores or re-authentication flows
vs alternatives: More seamless than generic auth MCP servers because it leverages Supabase's built-in session management and avoids redundant credential passing between agent and auth system
Invokes Supabase Edge Functions (serverless TypeScript/JavaScript functions) through MCP tools, passing parameters and receiving results with optional streaming support. Uses Supabase's edge function HTTP API to trigger functions with automatic authentication headers and response parsing, enabling agents to execute custom business logic without embedding it in the agent itself.
Supabase scores higher at 42/100 vs imgsys at 16/100. Supabase also has a free tier, making it more accessible.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Unique: Exposes Supabase Edge Functions as MCP tools with automatic authentication and response parsing, allowing agents to invoke custom serverless logic without managing HTTP clients or credential injection
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic HTTP MCP tools because it handles Supabase-specific authentication, error handling, and response formatting automatically
Subscribes to real-time changes on Supabase tables through MCP's event streaming interface, using Supabase's PostgreSQL LISTEN/NOTIFY mechanism to push INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE events to agents. Maintains persistent WebSocket connections and filters events by table and row-level policies, enabling agents to react to database changes without polling.
Unique: Bridges Supabase's PostgreSQL LISTEN/NOTIFY real-time system with MCP's tool interface, enabling agents to subscribe to database changes without managing WebSocket connections or event serialization
vs alternatives: More efficient than polling-based approaches because it uses Supabase's native real-time infrastructure rather than repeated database queries
Manages files in Supabase Storage buckets through MCP tools, supporting upload, download, list, and delete operations with automatic authentication and path-based access control. Uses Supabase's S3-compatible storage API with built-in support for public/private buckets and signed URLs for temporary access, enabling agents to handle file I/O without managing cloud storage credentials.
Unique: Exposes Supabase Storage's S3-compatible API as MCP tools with automatic authentication and signed URL generation, eliminating the need for agents to manage cloud storage credentials or generate temporary access tokens
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic S3 MCP tools because it leverages Supabase's built-in bucket policies and authentication rather than requiring separate AWS credentials
Performs semantic similarity searches on vector embeddings stored in Supabase PostgreSQL using pgvector extension, translating natural language queries into embedding vectors and executing cosine/L2 distance searches. Integrates with embedding providers (OpenAI, Cohere) or uses pre-computed embeddings, enabling agents to retrieve semantically similar documents or records without full-text search limitations.
Unique: Integrates pgvector directly into MCP tools with automatic embedding generation and distance calculation, enabling agents to perform semantic search without managing separate vector database infrastructure
vs alternatives: More efficient than external vector databases (Pinecone, Weaviate) for Supabase users because it colocates embeddings with relational data, reducing network latency and simplifying data synchronization
Exposes Supabase database schema information through MCP tools, allowing agents to discover table structures, column types, constraints, and relationships without manual schema documentation. Queries PostgreSQL information_schema and Supabase metadata tables to dynamically generate schema descriptions, enabling agents to construct valid queries and understand data relationships.
Unique: Queries Supabase's PostgreSQL information_schema directly through MCP tools, enabling agents to dynamically discover and adapt to database schemas without pre-configured schema definitions
vs alternatives: More flexible than static schema definitions because it reflects live database state, including recent migrations or schema changes
Enforces Supabase Row-Level Security policies within agent queries, ensuring that agents can only access rows permitted by RLS rules defined in the database. Evaluates policies based on authenticated user context (JWT claims, user ID) and applies WHERE clause filters automatically, preventing unauthorized data access at the database layer rather than application layer.
Unique: Delegates authorization enforcement to PostgreSQL RLS policies rather than implementing authorization in agent code, ensuring that data access rules are centralized and cannot be bypassed by agent logic
vs alternatives: More secure than application-level authorization because RLS is enforced at the database layer, preventing accidental data leaks even if agent code has bugs
+1 more capabilities