* **Instructions from _Evol-Instruct_ are superior to the ones from human-created ShareGPT.** When we use the same amount of _Evol-Instruct_ data (i.e., 70k) as Vicuna to fine-tune LLaMA 7B, our model _WizardLM_ significantly outperforms Vicuna, with the win rate of \(12.4\%\) and \(3.8\%\) higher than Vicuna on _Evol-Instruct_ testset and Vicuna's testset respectively on human evaluation. In addition, _WizardLM_ also achieves better response quality than Alpaca and Vicuna on the automatic evaluation of GPT-4. * **Labelers prefer _WizardLM_ outputs over outputs from ChatGPT under complex test instructions.** On _Evol-Instruct_ testset, _WizardLM_ performs worse than ChatGPT, with a win rate \(12.8\%\) lower than ChatGPT (\(28.0\%\) vs. \(40.8\%\)). However, in the high-difficulty section of _Evol-Instruct_ test set (difficulty level \(\geq 8\)), our _WizardLM_ even outperforms ChatGPT, with a win rate \(7.9\%\) larger than ChatGPT (\(42.9\%\) vs. \(35.0\%\)), that is human annotators even prefer the output of our model than ChatGPT on those hard questions. This indicates that _Evol-Instruct_ can significantly improve the ability of LLMs to handle complex instructions.