Abstract Seven different anti–PD-1 and PD-L1 mAbs are now widely used in the United States to treat a variety of cancer types, but no clinical trials have compared them directly. Furthermore, because many of these Abs do not cross-react between mouse and human proteins, no preclinical models exist in which to consider these types of questions. Thus, we produced humanized PD-1 and PD-L1 mice in which the extracellular domains of both mouse PD-1 and PD-L1 were replaced with the corresponding human sequences. Using this new model, we sought to compare the strength of the immune response generated by Food and Drug Administration–approved Abs. To do this, we performed an in vivo T cell priming assay in which anti–PD-1/L1 therapies were given at the time of T cell priming against surrogate tumor Ag (OVA), followed by subsequent B16-OVA tumor challenge. Surprisingly, both control and Ab-treated mice formed an equally robust OVA-specific T cell response at the time of priming. Despite this, anti–PD-1/L1-treated mice exhibited significantly better tumor rejection versus controls, with avelumab generating the best protection. To determine what could be mediating this, we identified the increased production of CX3CR1+PD-1+CD8+ cytotoxic T cells in the avelumab-treated mice, the same phenotype of effector T cells known to increase in clinical responders to PD-1/L1 therapy. Thus, our model permits the direct comparison of Food and Drug Administration–approved anti–PD-1/L1 mAbs and further correlates successful tumor rejection with the level of CX3CR1+PD-1+CD8 + T cells, making this model a critical tool for optimizing and better utilizing anti–PD-1/L1 therapeutics.