The leaders, at a glance

UnifyBench ranking

Name: UnifyBench public ranking snapshot
Creator: UnifyBench
Published: 2026-09-12T08:38:19.822Z

Compare AI models and measured effort settings across published benchmarks.

See the full ranking ↓How configurations are ranked

Capability leaders

Experimental comparison score · 0–100

For the selected profile and sources. Scores are experimental; small gaps may not be meaningful. How scoring works · Effort evidence collected 2026-09-12

451unique modelsEach model counted once across effort levels 492model configurationsDocumented model + effort settings, including unranked

109aggregated sourcesOriginal reports and benchmark leaderboards

Explore all 109 sources Independent evaluations and lab reports

Distinct source pages with published results in the catalog. Multiple results and page sections count as one source.

Every ranked row is a measured configuration. The default view shows the highest-scoring supported configuration per model. In Value, the budget is applied first. Select All efforts for the full comparison. How effort ranking works.

Customize ranking

Full ranking

215 entries

Capability ranking of measured model configurations. Scores are experimental; missing results remain unknown.
Rank	Model	Score	Evidence breadth	analyst-agent	briefcase	aime	apex-agents	aa-lcr	automationbench	critpt	enterprise-ops	gdp-pdf	gdpval	gmmlu	gpqa	harvey	hle	ifbench	itbench	livecodebench	math500	mmlu-pro	mmmu-pro	omniscience	scicode	tau-bench	terminal-bench	arc-agi	deepswe	swe-bench-pro	arc-agi-3	frontiercode	enigma-eval	swe-atlas-qna	swe-atlas-refactoring	swe-atlas-test-writing	livebench-math	livebench-coding	livebench-language	livebench-data	multi-swe-bench	livebench-reasoning	livebench-instructions	swe-rebench	epoch-game-puzzles	frontiermath	simpleqa	vals-finance-agent	vals-code-migration	vals-legal-research	vals-excel-modeling	vibe-code	chartography	osworld	charxiv	swe-bench-multilingual	deepsearchqa	officeqa	mcp-atlas	toolathlon	mrcr	browsecomp
201	Mistral Large 2 (July 2024) · Non-reasoningMistral Measured effort: Non-reasoning	0.9	Single independent source9 published · 9 families · 5 task areas100% weight: Artificial AnalysisWhy this score?	—	—	0.0108/108 peersIndependent evidence	—	12.9197/197 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	16.7212/212 peersIndependent evidence	—	2.8208/208 peersIndependent evidence	18.5178/178 peersIndependent evidence	—	19.3112/112 peersIndependent evidence	17.060/60 peersIndependent evidence	25.6114/114 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	42.4171/171 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
202	DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Llama-8B · ReasoningDeepSeek Measured effort: Reasoning	0.8	Single independent source7 published · 7 families · 4 task areas100% weight: Artificial AnalysisWhy this score?	—	—	43.8108/108 peersIndependent evidence	—	5.8197/197 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	5.0212/212 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	1.3178/178 peersIndependent evidence	—	13.8112/112 peersIndependent evidence	39.460/60 peersIndependent evidence	11.6114/114 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
203	GPT-4-turbo · Non-reasoningOpenAI Measured effort: Non-reasoning	0.8	Single independent source4 published · 4 families · 3 task areas100% weight: Artificial AnalysisWhy this score?	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	3.9208/208 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	22.5112/112 peersIndependent evidence	22.960/60 peersIndependent evidence	29.3114/114 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
204	Tiny Aya Global · Non-reasoningCohere Measured effort: Non-reasoning	0.8	Single independent source10 published · 9 families · 5 task areas100% weight: Artificial AnalysisWhy this score?	—	—	—	—	5.7197/197 peersIndependent evidence	—	25.2200/200 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	4.063/63 peersIndependent evidence	5.5212/212 peersIndependent evidence	—	31.7208/208 peersIndependent evidence	3.1178/178 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	2.4198/198 peersIndependent evidence	—	2.2171/171 peersIndependent evidence	3.3169/169 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
205	Amazon Nova Micro · Non-reasoningAmazon Measured effort: Non-reasoning	0.8	Single independent source13 published · 12 families · 5 task areas100% weight: Artificial AnalysisWhy this score?	—	—	3.9108/108 peersIndependent evidence	—	17.8197/197 peersIndependent evidence	—	25.5200/200 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	8.4212/212 peersIndependent evidence	—	24.1208/208 peersIndependent evidence	15.0178/178 peersIndependent evidence	—	9.2112/112 peersIndependent evidence	13.460/60 peersIndependent evidence	10.7114/114 peersIndependent evidence	—	10.9198/198 peersIndependent evidence	—	10.2171/171 peersIndependent evidence	12.4169/169 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
206	Gemma 3n E4B IT · Non-reasoningGoogle Measured effort: Non-reasoning	0.8	Single independent source16 published · 13 families · 6 task areas100% weight: Artificial AnalysisWhy this score?	—	—	12.8108/108 peersIndependent evidence	—	5.5197/197 peersIndependent evidence	—	25.5200/200 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	3.9212/212 peersIndependent evidence	—	20.1208/208 peersIndependent evidence	11.6178/178 peersIndependent evidence	—	10.3112/112 peersIndependent evidence	25.560/60 peersIndependent evidence	8.7114/114 peersIndependent evidence	2.0114/114 peersIndependent evidence	5.3198/198 peersIndependent evidence	—	2.8202/202 peersIndependent evidence	12.1201/201 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
207	Qwen3-0.6B · ReasoningQwen Measured effort: Reasoning	0.8	Single independent source13 published · 12 families · 5 task areas100% weight: Artificial AnalysisWhy this score?	—	—	14.1108/108 peersIndependent evidence	—	5.8197/197 peersIndependent evidence	—	25.2200/200 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	2.6212/212 peersIndependent evidence	—	34.6208/208 peersIndependent evidence	7.4178/178 peersIndependent evidence	—	4.0112/112 peersIndependent evidence	23.660/60 peersIndependent evidence	2.5114/114 peersIndependent evidence	—	2.8198/198 peersIndependent evidence	—	20.6171/171 peersIndependent evidence	3.3169/169 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
208	Gemma 3 4B IT · Non-reasoningGoogle Measured effort: Non-reasoning	0.7	Single independent source17 published · 14 families · 6 task areas100% weight: Artificial AnalysisWhy this score?	—	—	9.7108/108 peersIndependent evidence	—	12.6197/197 peersIndependent evidence	—	25.4200/200 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	2.863/63 peersIndependent evidence	3.4212/212 peersIndependent evidence	—	32.8208/208 peersIndependent evidence	12.8178/178 peersIndependent evidence	—	4.2112/112 peersIndependent evidence	23.660/60 peersIndependent evidence	5.0114/114 peersIndependent evidence	2.9114/114 peersIndependent evidence	4.7198/198 peersIndependent evidence	—	3.3202/202 peersIndependent evidence	6.0201/201 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
209	Phi-4-mini-instruct · Non-reasoningMicrosoft Measured effort: Non-reasoning	0.7	Single independent source15 published · 13 families · 5 task areas100% weight: Artificial AnalysisWhy this score?	—	—	4.9108/108 peersIndependent evidence	—	19.7197/197 peersIndependent evidence	—	25.5200/200 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	0.0123/123 peersIndependent evidence	—	6.5212/212 peersIndependent evidence	—	19.3208/208 peersIndependent evidence	3.8178/178 peersIndependent evidence	—	5.8112/112 peersIndependent evidence	11.560/60 peersIndependent evidence	6.9114/114 peersIndependent evidence	—	9.0198/198 peersIndependent evidence	—	6.4171/171 peersIndependent evidence	3.4201/201 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
210	Phi-4-multimodal-instruct · Non-reasoningMicrosoft Measured effort: Non-reasoning	0.6	Single independent source6 published · 6 families · 4 task areas100% weight: Artificial AnalysisWhy this score?	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	6.3212/212 peersIndependent evidence	—	29.0208/208 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	6.6112/112 peersIndependent evidence	12.160/60 peersIndependent evidence	7.8114/114 peersIndependent evidence	0.0114/114 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
211	Gemma 3n E2B IT · Non-reasoningGoogle Measured effort: Non-reasoning	0.6	Single independent source13 published · 12 families · 5 task areas100% weight: Artificial AnalysisWhy this score?	—	—	8.4108/108 peersIndependent evidence	—	5.6197/197 peersIndependent evidence	—	25.5200/200 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	1.3212/212 peersIndependent evidence	—	14.2208/208 peersIndependent evidence	5.5178/178 peersIndependent evidence	—	3.3112/112 peersIndependent evidence	8.060/60 peersIndependent evidence	3.7114/114 peersIndependent evidence	—	3.6198/198 peersIndependent evidence	—	2.3171/171 peersIndependent evidence	8.2169/169 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
212	Gemma 3 1B IT · Non-reasoningGoogle Measured effort: Non-reasoning	0.5	Single independent source14 published · 13 families · 5 task areas100% weight: Artificial AnalysisWhy this score?	—	—	2.9108/108 peersIndependent evidence	—	5.5197/197 peersIndependent evidence	—	25.5200/200 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	0.063/63 peersIndependent evidence	2.4212/212 peersIndependent evidence	—	33.6208/208 peersIndependent evidence	2.4178/178 peersIndependent evidence	—	0.9112/112 peersIndependent evidence	1.860/60 peersIndependent evidence	0.9114/114 peersIndependent evidence	—	0.6198/198 peersIndependent evidence	—	8.7171/171 peersIndependent evidence	3.3169/169 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
213	Gemma 3 270M IT · Non-reasoningGoogle Measured effort: Non-reasoning	0.5	Single independent source12 published · 11 families · 5 task areas100% weight: Artificial AnalysisWhy this score?	—	—	1.6108/108 peersIndependent evidence	—	5.6197/197 peersIndependent evidence	—	25.4200/200 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	0.8212/212 peersIndependent evidence	—	6.9208/208 peersIndependent evidence	0.0178/178 peersIndependent evidence	—	0.0112/112 peersIndependent evidence	—	0.0114/114 peersIndependent evidence	—	0.0198/198 peersIndependent evidence	—	7.1171/171 peersIndependent evidence	3.3169/169 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
214	DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-1.5B · ReasoningDeepSeek Measured effort: Reasoning	0.4	Single independent source8 published · 8 families · 4 task areas100% weight: Artificial AnalysisWhy this score?	—	—	20.3108/108 peersIndependent evidence	—	12.3197/197 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	0.0212/212 peersIndependent evidence	—	3.3208/208 peersIndependent evidence	0.6178/178 peersIndependent evidence	—	1.6112/112 peersIndependent evidence	7.260/60 peersIndependent evidence	2.2114/114 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
215	GPT-3.5-turbo · Non-reasoningOpenAI Measured effort: Non-reasoning	0.3	Single independent source3 published · 3 families · 2 task areas100% weight: Artificial AnalysisWhy this score?	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	4.1212/212 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	0.060/60 peersIndependent evidence	5.4114/114 peersIndependent evidence	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—

Behind the ranking

273 entries with published results · 215 ranked · 7 provisional estimates.

Explore seven capabilities, the original results, and gaps in the evidence.

Coding ranking Reasoning ranking Agentic ranking Compare capabilities ↗Published benchmarks ↗Evidence coverage ↗

Cite this ranking

Include the model and effort setting, the selected profile, and the dated data downloads. A shared link uses the latest data; it does not freeze a ranking in time.

UnifyBench ranking
Data updated: 12 Sept 2026
Mode: overall; evidence: documented; configurations: best
https://unifybench.ai/?page=9

Catalog data · Effort measurements · Configuration scoring rules · Methodology

Catalog dated 12 Sept 2026. Effort evidence collected 12 Sept 2026. Collection dates are not evaluation dates.

What does the score mean?

The adjusted comparison score estimates performance against the same reference panel from matched published comparisons. Capability pools matched comparisons across families and checks aggregate breadth and independent corroboration. Custom profiles require support in every selected capability. Missing results never count as losses.

Family details show observed win shares against available reference peers. Those descriptive values are supporting evidence, not adjusted capability scores. Provider reports and independent results remain labeled. Matching reported settings do not establish equal inference effort, and score differences do not establish statistical significance.

Read the full methodology →