RankingEffort benchmarks

DeepSeek V4-Pro 0813 · Max

Compare models

55 measured results · 6 effort settings · 41 benchmark/harness combinations

Change model

Compare with

Choose a second model and its effort to see both profiles and benchmark differences below.

Compare with

Capability profile

One configuration, seven capabilities

Comparison score · 0–100
DeepSeek V4-Pro 0813 · Max capability radarComparison scores from 0 to 100. Unknown capabilities have no point; lines stop at gaps. Hollow points are preliminary. Exact values and support labels follow the chart.AgenticHard reasoningCodingHuman prefKnowledgeMultimodalLong context50100DeepSeek V4-Pro 0813 · Max · Agentic: 48.3 · SupportedDeepSeek V4-Pro 0813 · Max · Hard reasoning: 49.5 · SupportedDeepSeek V4-Pro 0813 · Max · Coding: 48.2 · SupportedDeepSeek V4-Pro 0813 · Max · Knowledge: 38.0 · SupportedDeepSeek V4-Pro 0813 · Max · Long context: 54.8 · Preliminary

Gaps are unknown, not zero. Hollow points are preliminary.

  • Agentic

    A48.3Supported
  • Hard reasoning

    A49.5Supported
  • Coding

    A48.2Supported
  • Human pref

    Unknown
  • Knowledge

    A38.0Supported
  • Multimodal

    Unknown
  • Long context

    A54.8Preliminary

Each profile belongs to the named configuration. Capability scores use a shared panel for all axes, distinct from the overall ranking panel; they are not accuracy percentages or direct head-to-head wins.

Capability score evidence

DeepSeek V4-Pro 0813 · Max: 44.4 overall comparison score. Meets the overall evidence requirements.

5 areas measured. The available task mix affects this estimate; missing areas remain unknown.

Which sources carry the weight?
  • Artificial Analysis · 26.9% direct comparison weight · independent of the model provider
  • Epoch AI · 25.9% direct comparison weight · independent of the model provider
  • ARC Prize · 24.4% direct comparison weight · independent of the model provider
  • Vals AI · 22.8% direct comparison weight · independent of the model provider
Which benchmark families carry the weight?
  • ARC-AGI · 24.4% direct comparison weight
  • GPQA · 7.7% direct comparison weight
  • Aime · 5.5% direct comparison weight
  • epoch-game-puzzles · 5.2% direct comparison weight
  • simpleqa · 4.9% direct comparison weight
  • Other families (21) · 52.2% direct comparison weight

These shares describe direct comparison weight, not fractions of the final score or confidence. Source balancing does not give every family equal weight or remove correlations between overlapping sources.

How sensitive is this score?

The audit removes one source at a time and refits against the same overall reference panel. These published results use the matching dataset audited 2026-10-20.

Both ranks use the same surviving configurations for each removal. The cohort starts with 444 configurations supported in the original audit, including separate effort settings. These are diagnostic positions, not the default leaderboard ranks. Eligibility is not rechecked after removal.

What changes when a source is removed?
Removed sourceRank before → afterRank movementCohort remaining / lost supportScore after (change)
Artificial Analysis73 → 73No movement203 remaining / 241 lost44.4 (-0.0 points)
ARC Prize77 → 75Up 2444 remaining / 0 lost49.1 (+4.7 points)
Datacurve77 → 81Down 4444 remaining / 0 lost39.1 (-5.3 points)
LiveCodeBench77 → 77No movement444 remaining / 0 lost44.4 (-0.0 points)
Scale77 → 80Down 3444 remaining / 0 lost46.1 (+1.7 points)
Terminal-Bench77 → 77No movement444 remaining / 0 lost44.4 (-0.0 points)
Cognition77 → 79Down 2444 remaining / 0 lost43.3 (-1.1 points)
LiveBench77 → 79Down 2443 remaining / 1 lost45.1 (+0.7 points)
SWE-rebench77 → 79Down 2444 remaining / 0 lost44.0 (-0.4 points)
Epoch AI76 → 84Down 8431 remaining / 13 lost42.0 (-2.4 points)
Vals AI77 → 71Up 6443 remaining / 1 lost46.9 (+2.5 points)
Provider reports · Anthropic77 → 77No movement444 remaining / 0 lost44.4 (-0.0 points)
Provider reports · Moonshot AI77 → 78Down 1444 remaining / 0 lost43.8 (-0.5 points)
Provider reports · Meta77 → 77No movement444 remaining / 0 lost44.4 (-0.0 points)
Provider reports · Mistral77 → 77No movement444 remaining / 0 lost44.4 (+0.0 points)
Provider reports · OpenAI77 → 77No movement444 remaining / 0 lost44.5 (+0.1 points)
All provider reports77 → 77No movement444 remaining / 0 lost43.9 (-0.5 points)

Lost support means a configuration no longer has a comparison path to the complete reference panel. Its rank is unavailable. A surviving path alone does not establish leaderboard eligibility.

Overlapping sources may remain correlated even with source balancing. Leave-one-source-out movement is a sensitivity diagnostic, not a spread of source-specific ranks or a confidence measure. Scoring methodology · Dated configuration audit

Every benchmark family
Removed evidenceRecomputed scoreChange
deepswe39.1-5.3
arc-agi48.0+3.6
epoch-game-puzzles42.5-1.9
frontiermath45.9+1.5
terminal-bench45.8+1.4
mmmu-pro45.6+1.2
vibe-code43.3-1.1
frontiercode43.3-1.1
harvey43.3-1.1
mmlu-pro45.4+1.0
hle45.3+1.0
vals-legal-research43.6-0.8
gdp-pdf45.2+0.8
vals-excel-modeling45.1+0.7
enterprise-ops43.7-0.7
vals-code-migration43.9-0.5
arc-agi-343.9-0.5
aime43.9-0.4
swe-rebench44.0-0.4
multi-swe-bench44.0-0.4
automationbench44.1-0.3
tau-bench44.1-0.3
livebench-instructions44.7+0.3
simpleqa44.7+0.3
vals-finance-agent44.7+0.3
swe-atlas-qna44.1-0.3
terminal-bench-science44.7+0.3
livebench-language44.6+0.2
vals-tax-agent44.6+0.2
ifbench44.2-0.2
livebench-coding44.2-0.2
omniscience44.6+0.2
swe-atlas-test-writing44.2-0.2
gdpval44.3-0.1
enigma-eval44.3-0.1
livebench-reasoning44.3-0.1
apex-agents44.5+0.1
livebench-data44.5+0.1
itbench44.3-0.1
analyst-agent44.5+0.1
aa-lcr44.4+0.0
swe-atlas-refactoring44.4-0.0
livebench-math44.4+0.0
gpqa44.4+0.0
briefcase44.4-0.0
critpt44.4-0.0
math50044.4+0.0
swe-bench-pro44.4+0.0
livecodebench44.4+0.0
gmmlu44.4+0.0
What evidence is missing from the fit?

Across all collected settings for this model: 90 observations, 45 contributing, 0 matched without graph weight and 45 excluded. Counts do not establish rank eligibility.

  • 3 · Benchmark family or source protocol has not been reviewed
  • 2 · Original SciCode grading defects are under review; retained as supporting evidence, excluded from aggregate and capability scores. Corrected SciCode-Verified requires a separate protocol review. Sources: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.04975 and https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/scicode
  • 1 · DeepSeek V4 Pro checkpoint is not identified by this source; April and August revisions must not be combined.
  • 2 · DeepSeek V4 Pro checkpoint is unspecified; April and August must remain separate.
  • 2 · Evaluator has not been reviewed for independent admission
  • 14 · No reviewed effort for this catalog observation; any separately collected effort measurement is counted separately
  • 2 · No matched, identified effort unit; duplicates and unnamed comparators do not add evidence
  • 9 · Supporting evidence outside the reviewed capability core
  • 2 · Narrow specialist biological, medical or security evaluation; preserved as raw evidence outside general capability scoring.
  • 1 · The GLM card attributes this evaluation to Artificial Analysis; it is not a new Z.ai comparison.
  • 1 · Composite index or publisher-specific internal evaluation lacks a stable general-capability comparison unit. Composite index excluded to avoid double counting its ingredients.
  • 6 · Legacy self-report lacks a reviewed comparison configuration
Inspect every observation and exclusion →

Benchmark results

These are published benchmark scores. Supported effort estimates also appear on the Capability leaderboard. Results from different harnesses occupy different rows. Missing cells stay unknown; no scores are copied between effort levels.

Benchmark / sourceLowHighMaxNoneNon-reasoningUnspecified
AA-Briefcase EloArtificial Analysis · Artificial Analysis published evaluation; see source for benchmark-specific settings
Benchmark details

AA-Briefcase v1.1 is an agentic knowledge work benchmark developed by Artificial Analysis. AA-Briefcase Elo is a combined metric that aggregates rubric pass rate, analytical quality Elo and presentation Elo · Higher is better · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: elo. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
1,256.94 Elo
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reported
928.2 Elo
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro-non-reasoning

Not reported
AA-LCR v1.1Artificial Analysis · Artificial Analysis published evaluation; see source for benchmark-specific settings
Benchmark details

Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
80.33%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reported
50.67%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro-non-reasoning

Not reported
AutomationBench-AAArtificial Analysis · Artificial Analysis published evaluation; see source for benchmark-specific settings
Benchmark details

Share of task objectives completed with no guardrail violations · Higher is better · Benchmark developed by Zapier · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
56.71%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reported
34.91%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro-non-reasoning

Not reported
CritPtArtificial Analysis · Artificial Analysis published evaluation; see source for benchmark-specific settings
Benchmark details

Benchmark developed by Argonne and UIUC, with contributions from 60+ researchers globally. CritPt is under review by its authors following external feedback · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
18%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reported
0%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro-non-reasoning

Not reported
EnterpriseOps-Gym-AAArtificial Analysis · Artificial Analysis published evaluation; see source for benchmark-specific settings
Benchmark details

Overall task success rate across all eight enterprise domains (oracle tool mode) · Benchmark developed by ServiceNow Research · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
49.6%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
GDP.pdf: All-pass RateArtificial Analysis · Artificial Analysis published evaluation; see source for benchmark-specific settings
Benchmark details

Share of attempts where every atomic criterion passed · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
11.4%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reported
3.6%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro-non-reasoning

Not reported
GDPval-AA v2.1 LeaderboardArtificial Analysis · Artificial Analysis published evaluation; see source for benchmark-specific settings
Benchmark details

Elo rating for performance on real-world work tasks · Anchored to DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (max) at 1600 · Higher is better · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: elo. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
1,450.47 Elo
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reported
1,057.89 Elo
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro-non-reasoning

Not reported
GPQA DiamondArtificial Analysis · Artificial Analysis published evaluation; see source for benchmark-specific settings
Benchmark details

Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
92.83%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Humanity's Last ExamArtificial Analysis · Artificial Analysis published evaluation; see source for benchmark-specific settings
Benchmark details

Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
41.01%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reported
10.57%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro-non-reasoning

Not reported
MLCR-AAArtificial Analysis · Artificial Analysis published evaluation; see source for benchmark-specific settings
Benchmark details

Share of tasks judged accurate, complete, and concise · Expert + compound (hard) sets · Benchmark developed by Wisedocs · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
17.78%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
AA-Omniscience IndexArtificial Analysis · Artificial Analysis published evaluation; see source for benchmark-specific settings
Benchmark details

AA-Omniscience Index (higher is better) measures knowledge reliability and hallucination. It rewards correct answers, penalizes hallucinations, and has no penalty for refusing to answer. Scores range from -100 to 100, where 0 means as many correct as incorrect answers, and negative scores mean more incorrect than correct. · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: index. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
0.83
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reported
-12.38
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro-non-reasoning

Not reported
AA-Omniscience AccuracyArtificial Analysis · 6000 questions; 1 attempt; correct-answer share; GPT-5.6 Luna medium grader
Benchmark details

AA-Omniscience Accuracy (higher is better) measures the proportion of correctly answered questions out of all questions, regardless of whether the model chooses to answer · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
49.1%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reported
41.45%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro-non-reasoning

Not reported
SciCodeArtificial Analysis · Artificial Analysis published evaluation; see source for benchmark-specific settings
Benchmark details

Benchmark curated by scientists across 16 disciplines. SciCode is under review following an independent audit of the dataset · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
51.04%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reported
39.93%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro-non-reasoning

Not reported
𝜏³-BankingArtificial Analysis · Artificial Analysis published evaluation; see source for benchmark-specific settings
Benchmark details

Benchmark developed by Sierra Research · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
39.59%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1Artificial Analysis · mini-swe-agent; Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1.0; 70 tasks; pass@1 averaged over 3 repeats
Benchmark details

Share of tasks passed (pass@1), averaged over three repeats · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
5.71%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Terminal-Bench v2.1Artificial Analysis · Artificial Analysis published evaluation; see source for benchmark-specific settings
Benchmark details

Benchmark developed by the Laude Institute and open-source contributors · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
78.65%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Terminal-Bench v4.0Artificial Analysis · mini-SWE-agent v2.4.6; 66 tasks; pass@1 averaged over 3 repeats; 500 steps; task timeout up to 8 hours
Benchmark details

Benchmark developed by the Laude Institute, Stanford, and open-source contributors · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
14.14%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro

Not reported
1.52%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning); Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-pro-non-reasoning

Not reported
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize · v2 Semi-Private
Benchmark details

Original public board. Configuration and task coverage may differ; inspect source.

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

56.25%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Low); Source model ID: deepseek-v4-pro-0813-low; 120 tasks

59.72%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (High); Source model ID: deepseek-v4-pro-0813-high; 120 tasks

61.25%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Max); Source model ID: deepseek-v4-pro-0813-max; 120 tasks

0.83%
Reported settings

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (None); Source model ID: deepseek-v4-pro-0813-none; 120 tasks

Not reportedNot reported
DeepSWE v1.1Datacurve · mini-swe-agent
Benchmark details

Original public board. Configuration and task coverage may differ; inspect source.

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
62.8%
Reported settings

deepseek-v4-pro; Reported effort: max; 113 unique tasks; 452 attempts; 4 runs

DeepSeek V4 Pro checkpoint is not identified by this source; April and August revisions must not be combined.

Source label needs review
Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
FrontierCode 1.1 · extended-chiselCognition · chisel
Benchmark details

FrontierCode 1.1; chisel. Open each result for its exact effort, task subset, metric and protocol details.

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reported
44.45%
Reported settings

FrontierCode 1.1; extended; 150 tasks; chisel; source effort high; weighted rubric score, not pass rate; unfair internet runs zeroed by evaluator; flag rate 0.076

Not reportedNot reportedNot reportedNot reported
FrontierCode 1.1 · extended-mini-swe-agentCognition · mini-swe-agent
Benchmark details

FrontierCode 1.1; mini-swe-agent. Open each result for its exact effort, task subset, metric and protocol details.

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedNot reported
31.01%
Reported settings

FrontierCode 1.1; extended; 150 tasks; mini-swe-agent; source effort none; weighted rubric score, not pass rate; unfair internet runs zeroed by evaluator; flag rate 0.0067

DeepSeek V4 Pro checkpoint is unspecified; April and August must remain separate.

Source label needs review
FrontierCode 1.1 · main-chiselCognition · chisel
Benchmark details

FrontierCode 1.1; chisel. Open each result for its exact effort, task subset, metric and protocol details.

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reported
28.55%
Reported settings

FrontierCode 1.1; main; 100 tasks; chisel; source effort high; weighted rubric score, not pass rate; unfair internet runs zeroed by evaluator; flag rate 0.106

Not reportedNot reportedNot reportedNot reported
FrontierCode 1.1 · main-mini-swe-agentCognition · mini-swe-agent
Benchmark details

FrontierCode 1.1; mini-swe-agent. Open each result for its exact effort, task subset, metric and protocol details.

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedNot reported
17.64%
Reported settings

FrontierCode 1.1; main; 100 tasks; mini-swe-agent; source effort none; weighted rubric score, not pass rate; unfair internet runs zeroed by evaluator; flag rate 0.01

DeepSeek V4 Pro checkpoint is unspecified; April and August must remain separate.

Source label needs review
Epoch · Chess Puzzles · v2.0.0Epoch AI · Epoch AI Inspect; task 2.0.0; scorer exact
Benchmark details

Epoch AI internal evaluation. Mean accuracy under the published setting; exact task version and scorer stay separate. Related tasks share a family budget. Data by Epoch AI, CC BY.

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
46%
Reported settings

Epoch AI Inspect; task 2.0.0; scorer exact; model=deepseek-v4-pro-0813_max; run=C56VHYLMeww2wXebeJh3gg; mean accuracy; https://epoch.ai/data/benchmarks.csv

Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Epoch · FrontierMath Tier 4 · v2.0.0Epoch AI · Epoch AI Inspect; task 2.0.0; scorer verification_code
Benchmark details

Epoch AI internal evaluation. Mean accuracy under the published setting; exact task version and scorer stay separate. Related tasks share a family budget. Data by Epoch AI, CC BY. FrontierMath was developed with OpenAI funding and unequal access to part of the question set; this result is from Epoch's evaluation.

Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-10-18.

Not reportedNot reported
26.83%
Reported settings

Epoch AI Inspect; task 2.0.0; scorer verification_code; model=deepseek-v4-pro-0813_max; run=a4uV8HMMBAcHXLVSmZfBgX; mean accuracy; https://epoch.ai/data/benchmarks.csv

Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
What these comparisons mean

Each source reports its own effort labels. Matching labels do not establish equal compute budgets or identical fallback behavior. Open Reported settings to inspect the exact model name, agent and task coverage. Multiple results at one level remain visible rather than selecting the best. Source-reported None or Non-reasoning labels are not treated as evidence that an API supports those settings.

These measurements use their own dated source collection. The leaderboard fits identified configurations jointly; it contains no pooled model ratings. Explicit thinking budgets are separate configurations. Read the methodology.

Download all effort benchmark results · 8,915 results across 259 models · Collected 2026-10-18