Model comparison
The Latent benchmark database
Published benchmark results for 31 frontier models, kept in each benchmark's native units and grouped into 7 capability domains.
These results are scattered across lab announcements, leaderboards, and PDFs, and no two of them are reported the same way. This page gathers the benchmarks worth comparing into one table, exactly as their publishers reported them.
17 benchmarks on this page
Coding & software engineering
Agentic terminal work, issue resolution, long-horizon engineering, competitive coding, and autonomous ML engineering.
| Benchmark | Opus 5.5Anthropic | GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | Gemini 4 ArgonGoogle | Fable 5.1Anthropic | Sonnet 5.5Anthropic | Opus 5Anthropic | MiMo-V2.6-ProXiaomi | Fable 5Anthropic | GPT-6.1 SolOpenAI | GPT-6 SolOpenAI | Muse Spark 1.3Meta | DeepSeek V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | GPT-5.6 SolOpenAI | Grok 4.7xAI | Grok 4.6xAI | Kimi K3Moonshot AI | GLM-5.3Z.ai | Gemini 3.8 FlashGoogle | Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle | Claude Haiku 5.5Anthropic | GPT-6 LunaOpenAI | GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI | GLM 5.3 FlashZ.ai | Qwen3.8-MaxAlibaba | Muse Spark 1.2Meta | DeepSeek V4 ProDeepSeek | Mistral Large 4Mistral AI | GPT-5.6 LunaOpenAI | Sonnet 5Anthropic | Qwen3.8-27BAlibaba | DeepSeek V4 FlashDeepSeek | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CursorBench v3.2Current values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | - | - | - | 73.4% | - | 70% | - | 70.5% | - | - | - | - | 67.2% | - | 70.8% | 60.8% | - | 69.2% | 61.6% | - | - | 64.9% | - | - | - | - | - | 61.1% | 61.5% | - | - | — |
| DeepSWE v1.1Current values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | 74.2% | 74.12% | 77.9% | 67.4% | 71% | 73.65% | 71.9% | 69.91% | - | 68.8% | 75.4% | 74.2% | 72.67% | 71% | 67.48% | 68.51% | 68.96% | 73.83% | 65.49% | - | 66.6% | 69.62% | - | 57.46% | 54.87% | 62.83% | - | 67.19% | 53.85% | 42.2% | 53.32% | — |
| Frontier-Bench v0.1 - Anthropic H2HCurrent values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | - | - | - | - | - | 43.3% | - | 33.7% | - | - | - | - | 34.4% | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | SourceCitation |
| FrontierCode v1.1 ExtendedCurrent values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | 65.3% | 64.48% | - | 63.6% | 64.4% | 63.63% | - | 64.94% | - | 60.69% | - | - | 60.55% | - | 61.31% | 58.19% | - | 53.45% | - | - | 56.1% | 55.84% | - | - | - | - | - | 55.06% | 56.18% | - | 31.7% | — |
| FrontierSWECurrent values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | - | - | - | 57% | - | - | - | 86.6% | - | - | - | - | 71.3% | - | - | 81.2% | 78.1% | - | - | - | - | - | - | 73.5% | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | SourceCitation |
| Internal Database Migration Tasks - OpenAICurrent values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | - | 63.9% | - | 57.8% | - | - | - | 50.3% | - | - | - | - | 42.7% | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | — |
| LiveCodeBenchCurrent values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | - | - | - | 90.52% | - | 89.03% | - | 89.78% | - | - | - | - | 82.6% | - | 88.22% | 87.19% | 80.53% | 89.48% | 88.65% | - | - | 85.93% | - | 87.85% | - | 87.53% | - | - | 82.43% | 84% | 87.26% | SourceCitation |
| NL2RepoCurrent values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 65.4% | - | - | - | 58% | 58% | - | - | - | - | - | - | 55.9% | - | 61.5% | - | - | - | 42.3% | 54.2% | — |
| PostTrainBenchCurrent values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | - | - | - | - | - | 35.04% | - | 41.8% | - | - | - | - | 34.6% | - | - | 36.6% | 39.8% | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | — |
| ProgramBench v1 (Raw Pass Rate) - ValsCurrent values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | - | 85.42% | - | 82.69% | - | 82.27% | - | - | - | - | - | - | 77.64% | - | - | 62.77% | 66.25% | 71.9% | 68.66% | - | - | 72.35% | - | 39.97% | - | 70.1% | - | 68.29% | 72.07% | 11.17% | - | Source |
| SciCodeCurrent values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | 66.9% | 56.48% | 61.81% | 63.08% | - | 56.37% | 60.88% | 60% | 55.79% | 57.64% | 59.72% | - | 57.75% | 57.75% | 56.48% | 59.49% | 59.03% | 56.6% | 59.84% | 54.98% | 54.63% | 54.98% | 51.62% | 53.24% | 57.41% | 51.04% | 54.17% | 53.59% | 54.28% | 46.64% | 50.35% | SourceCitation |
| SWE-bench Verified - ValsCurrent values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | - | - | - | - | - | 97% | - | 95% | - | - | - | - | 96.2% | - | 95.6% | 93.4% | 95.4% | 80% | 80.8% | - | - | 95.4% | - | 85.6% | 86.6% | 96.4% | - | 93% | 79.6% | 86% | 88.8% | — |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1Current values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | - | 89.89% | - | 91.4% | - | 89.14% | 89.9% | 84.6% | - | - | 85.77% | 90.6% | 89.51% | - | 88.39% | 85.02% | 83.9% | 87.64% | 85.77% | - | - | 88.01% | - | 81.27% | 80.15% | 78.65% | - | 80.9% | 80.52% | 79.78% | 78.65% | — |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0Current values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | 66.36% | 58.2% | 57.4% | 57.9% | 70.6% | 51.8% | 34.9% | 44.5% | - | - | - | 31.2% | 37.3% | 38% | 20.3% | - | 41.8% | 19.1% | 11.2% | 39.2% | - | 21.5% | - | - | - | - | - | 17.3% | 12.4% | - | - | — |
| Terminal-Bench Science 0.1Current values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | 58.7% | 64.6% | - | 52.6% | 59.9% | 30% | - | 21.4% | - | - | - | - | 22.4% | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | — |
| Terminal-Bench v3.0Current values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | - | - | - | - | - | 42.7% | - | 34.1% | - | - | - | 30% | 34.6% | - | 26.5% | 17.4% | 32.4% | - | 14.9% | - | - | 20.8% | - | - | - | - | - | 14.3% | 14.6% | - | - | — |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 - ValsCurrent values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | - | 89.59% | 91.9% | 90.26% | - | 88.4% | - | 90.35% | - | - | - | - | 80.5% | - | 76.24% | 84.96% | 78.13% | 78.65% | 70.39% | - | - | 74.59% | - | 64.7% | 79.1% | 82.3% | - | 77.06% | 81.33% | 64.85% | 74.74% | — |
3 benchmarks on this page
Agentic tool & computer use
Tool orchestration, MCP servers, business-workflow automation, browsing, and GUI computer use.
| Benchmark | Opus 5.5Anthropic | GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | Gemini 4 ArgonGoogle | Fable 5.1Anthropic | Sonnet 5.5Anthropic | Opus 5Anthropic | MiMo-V2.6-ProXiaomi | Fable 5Anthropic | GPT-6.1 SolOpenAI | GPT-6 SolOpenAI | Muse Spark 1.3Meta | DeepSeek V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | GPT-5.6 SolOpenAI | Grok 4.7xAI | Grok 4.6xAI | Kimi K3Moonshot AI | GLM-5.3Z.ai | Gemini 3.8 FlashGoogle | Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle | Claude Haiku 5.5Anthropic | GPT-6 LunaOpenAI | GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI | GLM 5.3 FlashZ.ai | Qwen3.8-MaxAlibaba | Muse Spark 1.2Meta | DeepSeek V4 ProDeepSeek | Mistral Large 4Mistral AI | GPT-5.6 LunaOpenAI | Sonnet 5Anthropic | Qwen3.8-27BAlibaba | DeepSeek V4 FlashDeepSeek | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agents' Last ExamCurrent values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | - | - | - | - | - | 31.6% | 31.6% | 25.7% | - | - | - | 31.8% | 30.6% | - | - | 28.3% | 28.5% | - | 26.3% | - | - | 28% | 26.3% | 27% | - | 12.4% | - | 30.3% | - | 20.4% | 25.2% | SourceCitation |
| Agents' Last Exam - OpenAI H2HCurrent values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | - | 59.3% | - | - | - | 55.5% | - | 48.7% | - | 56.4% | - | - | 53.6% | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | — |
| APEX-Agents Mean Criteria PassedCurrent values follow the best-published-reasoning-mode policy. Individual source, configuration and admission decisions are disclosed on /methodology#model-evidence. Collected values without a matching review remain visible but do not contribute. | - | 75.1% | - | 77.1% | - | 60.6% | - | 59.2% | - | - | - | - | 56.7% | - | 57.5% | 55.4% | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 48.5% | - | 51.6% | — |
No benchmark matches your filters. Try a shorter query or clear the domain filter.
Reading this table
Native units, nothing adjusted
Units
Cells show each benchmark's native scale: accuracy percentages, Elo ratings, or points. Nothing is rescaled or converted, so compare along a row. Two different rows are two different scales.
Best in row
The strongest published result in each row is highlighted. A blank cell means that model has no published result on that benchmark, which is not the same as a zero.
What gets listed
A benchmark earns a row when its result is published against a named model version with a stated metric, and when enough models have run it for the comparison to mean something. Numbers we cannot trace back to a source are left out.
Provenance
Results are current as of 2026-10-10. Vendor-reported head-to-head rows are named as such (e.g. “Anthropic H2H”) and carry their caveats in the row notes.
Evidence downloads: manifest · dataset JSON · results CSV · citations CSV