Machine Learning Benchmarks

Machine learning engineering benchmarks and AI model leaderboards for post-training, kernel optimization, and software optimization work

Machine Learning Engineering: Scores and Sources

Explore 5 benchmarks and their source-backed results below. Domain IQ uses the same shared scorer as the interactive charts and public API and remains outside Composite IQ. Coverage shows how many domain benchmarks contribute to each estimate; incomplete coverage and different evaluation harnesses limit direct comparisons. Read the scoring methodology.

Highest domain scores among tracked public models

ModelDomain IQCoverage
GPT 6 Astra1511/5
Fable 51474/5
Opus 4.81455/5
Opus 51451/5
GPT 5.6 Terra1441/5
Glm 5.21434/5
GPT 5.3 Codex1431/5
Kimi K31431/5
Opus 4.61422/5
GPT 5.51415/5
Opus 4.71413/5
GPT 5.6 Sol1404/5
GPT 5.41363/5
GPT 5.21352/5
Sonnet 4.61351/5
WeirdML — 123 models

Average max accuracy across 17 unusual machine-learning tasks. Higher scores are better. Source: WeirdML v2.

Model or systemEvaluation harnessSource-backed score
GPT 6 AstraOpenAI responses92.87%
Fable 5OpenRouter91.94%
GPT 5.6 SolOpenRouter88.76%
Fable 5Anthropic messages87.85%
GPT 5.5OpenRouter84.91%
GPT 5.5OpenAI responses83.9%
Opus 4.8OpenRouter82.89%
GPT 5.6 TerraOpenRouter78.27%
Opus 4.6Anthropic messages77.95%
GPT 5.3 CodexOpenRouter77.9%
GPT 5.4OpenAI responses77.7%
Opus 4.7Anthropic messages76.44%
Opus 4.7 NonreasoningAnthropic messages76.4%
Opus 4.8OpenRouter76.04%
Opus 4.7OpenRouter75.45%
GPT 5.2OpenAI responses72.19%
Gemini 3.1 ProOpenRouter72.07%
Opus 4.8 NonreasoningOpenRouter70.45%
Glm 5.2OpenRouter70.12%
Gemini 3 ProOpenRouter69.93%
Sonnet 5OpenRouter68.78%
Glm 5.2OpenRouter67.31%
GPT 5.5:no_thinkingOpenAI responses67.15%
Sonnet 4.6OpenRouter66.07%
Opus 4.6 NonreasoningOpenRouter65.87%
Opus 4.5Anthropic messages63.74%
GPT 5.2:mediumOpenAI responses63.44%
Gemini 3.5 FlashOpenRouter62.64%
Gemini 3 FlashOpenRouter61.6%
GPT 5.6 LunaOpenRouter60.86%
GPT 5.1OpenRouter60.77%
GPT 5OpenAI responses60.7%
GPT 5.2 ProOpenAI responses60.39%
GPT 5.4 MiniOpenAI responses60.3%
O3 ProOpenAI responses58.21%
GPT 5.4OpenRouter57.44%
Glm 5.1OpenRouter57.1%
Kimi K2.6OpenRouter55.86%
GPT 5.2 CodexOpenRouter54.53%
Kimi K2.7 CodeOpenRouter54.12%
Gemini 2.5 ProOpenRouter54.03%
GPT 5 MiniOpenAI responses52.67%
O4 MiniOpenRouter52.56%
O3OpenAI responses52.42%
Gemma 4 31bOllama52.26%
Grok 4.20OpenRouter52.26%
Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteOpenRouter52.19%
Grok 4.3OpenRouter49.89%
GPT 5.2:noneOpenAI responses49.6%
GPT 5.4 NanoOpenAI responses49.23%
Deepseek V4 Profireworks48.9%
Glm 5OpenRouter48.17%
GPT Oss 120bOllama48.17%
Sonnet 4.5OpenRouter47.71%
O1OpenRouter47.56%
Deepseek V3.2OpenRouter46.73%
Sonnet 4.5OpenRouter46.7%
Deepseek V4 Profireworks46.53%
Claude 4 Sonnet 20250522:16kOpenRouter46.11%
O1OpenRouter46.08%
Opus 4.1OpenRouter45.86%
Grok 4OpenRouter45.73%
Deepseek V4 FlashOpenRouter45.63%
Kimi K2.5OpenRouter45.6%
Haiku 4.5OpenRouter45.4%
Haiku 4.5OpenRouter44.15%
Claude 4 Sonnet 20250522OpenRouter43.88%
Deepseek V4 FlashOpenRouter43.76%
Claude 4 Opus 20250522:16kOpenRouter43.72%
Mistral Medium 3.5Ollama43.71%
O3 Mini High 2025 01 31OpenRouter43.7%
Nemotron 3 UltraOpenRouter43.45%
Mercury 2OpenRouter43.2%
Grok 4.1 FastOpenRouter42.86%
Kimi K2OpenRouter42.79%
Grok 3 MiniOpenRouter42.58%
Glm 5.2OpenRouter42.1%
Gemini 2.5 Flash 09 2025:16kOpenRouter41.91%
GPT Oss 120bOpenRouter41.88%
Deepseek R1OpenRouter41.63%
Qwen3 CoderOpenRouter41.17%
Qwen3 235b A22b Thinking 2507OpenRouter41.04%
Gemini 2.5 Flash:16kOpenRouter40.95%
GPT Oss 20bOllama40.93%
Glm 4.5OpenRouter40.58%
Claude 3.5 SonnetOpenRouter39.97%
GPT 5 ChatOpenRouter39.77%
Qwen3.5 27bOllama39.53%
Deepseek V3.2 ExpOpenRouter39.48%
GPT 4.5OpenRouter39.37%
Kimi K2OpenRouter39.36%
GPT 4.1 2025 04 14OpenRouter39.04%
Qwen3 235b A22b 07 25OpenRouter38.7%
Deepseek Chat V3.1:thinkingOpenRouter38.36%
GPT 5 NanoOpenAI responses38.06%
Nemotron 3 Super:120b A12b Q4_K_MOllama38.01%
GPT 5.4 Nano:noneOpenAI responses37.96%
GPT 5.4 Mini:noneOpenAI responses37.9%
GPT 4.1 Mini 2025 04 14OpenRouter37.61%
Deepseek Chat V3.1OpenRouter37.5%
Qwen3 235b A22bOpenRouter37.28%
Grok 3OpenRouter37.24%
Minimax M2.7OpenRouter36.95%
GPT Oss 20bOpenRouter36.83%
Kimi K2OpenRouter36.68%
Deepseek R1OpenRouter36.49%
O1 MiniOpenRouter36.32%
Deepseek Chat V3 0324OpenRouter36.08%
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite 06 17:16kOpenRouter35.22%
Gemma4:26b A4b It Q4_K_MOllama35.17%
Grok Code Fast 1OpenRouter35.06%
Qwen3.6 35b A3bOllama34.49%
Qwen3 Coder NextOpenRouter34.4%
Mistral Medium 3.1OpenRouter33.13%
Claude 3.5 Sonnet 20240620OpenRouter30.97%
Claude 3.5 HaikuOpenRouter30.73%
Qwen3 30b A3bOpenRouter29.75%
GPT 5 NanoOpenAI responses25.89%
Gemini 2.0 Flash 001OpenRouter25.77%
GPT 4oOpenRouter25.12%
Gemini Flash 1.5OpenRouter24.87%
Llama 4 MaverickOpenRouter24.47%
Grok 2OpenRouter22.24%
Gemini Pro 1.5OpenRouter22.2%
Llama 3.1 405b InstructOpenRouter21.38%
Claude 3 OpusAnthropic messages19.22%
GPT 4.1 Nano 2025 04 14OpenRouter18.98%
GPT 4 TurboOpenRouter18.01%
Qwen 2.5 72b InstructOpenRouter15.97%
Llama 3.3 70b InstructOpenRouter14.44%
Deepseek R1 0528 Qwen3 8bOpenRouter12.99%
GPT 4OpenRouter12.36%
GPT 4o MiniOpenRouter11.76%
Qwen2:72b Instruct Q8_0Ollama11.3%
Claude 3 SonnetOpenRouter10.16%
Claude 3 HaikuOpenRouter9.84%
Llama 3.1 70b InstructOpenRouter8.97%
Claude 2.1OpenRouter7.06%
GPT 3.5 TurboOpenRouter3.48%
Mixtral 8x22b InstructOpenRouter3.17%
Llama 3.1 8b InstructOpenRouter1.73%
GSO-Bench — 20 models

GSO Opt@1 scores for agentic software optimization against expert commits. Higher scores are better. Source: GSO leaderboard.

Model or systemEvaluation harnessSource-backed score
Opus 4.8OpenHands47.06%
Opus 4.7OpenHands44.12%
Opus 4.6OpenHands41.18%
GPT 5.5OpenHands40.2%
Sonnet 5OpenHands37.25%
GPT 5.4OpenHands31.37%
GPT 5.2OpenHands27.45%
Opus 4.5OpenHands26.47%
Gemini 3.1 ProOpenHands22.55%
Gemini 3 ProOpenHands18.63%
Sonnet 4.5OpenHands14.71%
GPT 5.1OpenHands13.73%
Gemini 3 FlashOpenHands9.8%
O3OpenHands8.82%
GPT 5OpenHands6.86%
Opus 4OpenHands6.86%
Kimi K2OpenHands4.9%
Gemini 2.5 ProOpenHands3.92%
O4 MiniOpenHands3.6%
GPT 4oOpenHands0%
KernelBench Hard — 13 models

Mean scored peak-fraction across KernelBench Hard problems. Higher scores are better. Source: kernelbench.com Hard.

Model or systemEvaluation harnessSource-backed score
GPT 5.6 Solcodex, 4/4 scored30.02%
Glm 5.2zai-claude, 6/6 scored26.14%
Opus 4.8claude, 6/6 scored24.44%
Fable 5claude, 5/5 scored23.41%
Sonnet 5claude, 6/6 scored22.79%
Minimax M3minimax-claude, 5/6 scored22.44%
GPT 5.5codex, 6/6 scored21.74%
Grok 4.5grok, 6/6 scored21.42%
Deepseek V4 Prodeepseek-claude, 5/6 scored19.08%
Kimi K2.7 Codekimi-claude, 5/6 scored17.22%
Longcat 2.0longcat-claude, 5/6 scored16.41%
Composer 2.5 Fastcursor, 6/6 scored15.39%
Gemini 3.5 Flashgemini, 6/6 scored12.23%
KernelBench Mega — 12 models

Best decode speedup over optimized PyTorch on KernelBench Mega. Higher scores are better. Source: kernelbench.com Mega.

Model or systemEvaluation harnessSource-backed score
Opus 4.8claude / B20019.351×
Fable 5claude / RTX PRO 600018.715×
Glm 5.2zai-claude / RTX PRO 600011.142×
GPT 5.5codex / B2009.37×
Minimax M3minimax-claude / B2004.151×
Sonnet 5claude / RTX PRO 60004.03×
Gemini 3.5 Flashgemini / H1002.737×
GPT 5.6 Solcodex / RTX PRO 60002.637×
Kimi K2.7 Codekimi-claude / RTX PRO 60002.586×
Composer 2.5 Fastcursor / RTX PRO 60002.482×
Deepseek V4 Prodeepseek-claude / RTX PRO 60002.106×
Grok 4.5grok / RTX PRO 60000.816×
PostTrainBench v1.1 — 11 models

Recomputed agent scores under v1.1 integrity checks for post-training small language models with a 10-hour H100 budget. Higher scores are better. Source: PostTrainBench v1.1 leaderboard.

Model or systemEvaluation harnessSource-backed score
Fable 5Claude Code · Max41.79%
GPT 5.6 SolCodex CLI · Max36.23%
Opus 5Claude Code34.06%
Opus 4.8Claude Code · High33.84%
Opus 4.8Claude Code · Max32.9%
Kimi K3Claude Code · 1M context31.96%
Glm 5.2Claude Code · Max31.7%
Opus 4.7Claude Code · xHigh28.56%
GPT 5.5Codex CLI · xHigh27.23%
Grok 4.5Cursor CLI · High23.45%
Gemini 3.1 ProOpenCode21.99%
GPT 5.4Codex CLI · High19%