llmboard.aiAI model intelligence
Home

Model Rankings

OverallOpen ModelsAgentCodingReasoningMathKnowledgeInstruction FollowingTextVision
Image GenerationImage Editing
Video GenerationImage to VideoVideo Editing
Text to SpeechSpeech to Text
Embeddings

Efficiency

Chat Token PricingImage PricingVideo PricingAudio Pricing
Chat Speed & LatencyProvider Reliability

Benchmarks

GPQAMMLU-ProAIME 2025SWE-Bench VerifiedMMLUHumanity's Last ExamLiveCodeBenchMATHHumanEvalMMMU-Pro
All Benchmarks

Tools

Model Directory

Scoring & Data

Scoring & Data
1367 models808 benchmarks

Leaderboard Center

Overall RankingCodingCore BenchmarksPrice & ValueRuntime Performance

Modalities

All ModelsImage GenerationImage EditingVideo GenerationImage-to-VideoVideo EditingText-to-SpeechSpeech-to-TextEmbeddings

Data & Methods

Scoring MethodAll Benchmarks
llmboard.aiCopyright 2026 llmboard.ai

Unspecified benchmark

LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq Leaderboard

LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq is listed with a current leaderboard and an Agent Score measured as a ratio.

Updated Oct 23, 2026

Models45
Model coverage45
MetricAgent Score
EvidenceA

On this page

  • Ranking
  • Highlights
  • Distribution
  • Top models
  • About
  • FAQ

LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq Ranking

Higher agent score ranks better on this benchmark.

30 of 45 rows
Columns

Show columns

Sort by
Rank
Model
Agent Score
Percentile
Participants
Observations
Evidence
Evaluated
Rank01ModelANClaude Opus 4.8AnthropicAgent Score15.74% (13.50% - 17.98%)Percentile100.00%Participants45Observations12.2KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank02ModelANClaude Sonnet 5AnthropicAgent Score15.57% (14.52% - 16.62%)Percentile97.73%Participants45Observations44.5KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank03ModelOPGPT-5.5OpenAIAgent Score13.33% (11.83% - 14.83%)Percentile95.45%Participants45Observations20.1KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank04ModelANClaude Fable 5AnthropicAgent Score12.87% (11.21% - 14.52%)Percentile93.18%Participants45Observations33.5KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank05ModelOPGPT-5.6 SolOpenAIAgent Score11.91% (10.67% - 13.14%)Percentile90.91%Participants45Observations45.3KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank06ModelANClaude Opus 5AnthropicAgent Score11.85% (10.79% - 12.91%)Percentile88.64%Participants45Observations55.9KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank07ModelGOGemini 3.8 FlashGoogleAgent Score11.23% (10.72% - 11.75%)Percentile86.36%Participants45Observations408.8KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank08ModelANClaude Fable 5.1AnthropicAgent Score10.80% (9.70% - 11.91%)Percentile84.09%Participants45Observations49.2KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank09ModelOPGPT-6 AstraOpenAIAgent Score10.71% (8.72% - 12.69%)Percentile81.82%Participants45Observations10.7KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank10ModelOPGPT-5.4OpenAIAgent Score10.25% (8.36% - 12.14%)Percentile79.55%Participants45Observations19.3KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank11ModelXAGrok 4.6xAIAgent Score9.24% (8.02% - 10.45%)Percentile77.27%Participants45Observations38.5KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank12ModelXAGrok 4.7xAIAgent Score8.98% (8.16% - 9.79%)Percentile75.00%Participants45Observations142.3KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank13ModelANClaude Haiku 5.5AnthropicAgent Score7.78% (6.85% - 8.71%)Percentile72.73%Participants45Observations80KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank14ModelGOGemini 3.7 FlashGoogleAgent Score7.63% (6.31% - 8.95%)Percentile70.45%Participants45Observations97.3KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank15ModelOPGPT-5.6 LunaOpenAIAgent Score7.39% (6.44% - 8.34%)Percentile68.18%Participants45Observations130.1KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank16ModelACQwen3.7 MaxAlibaba Cloud / Qwen TeamAgent Score6.43% (3.71% - 9.15%)Percentile65.91%Participants45Observations22.6KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank17ModelTMInkling-SmallThinking Machines LabAgent Score4.97% (0.80% - 9.15%)Percentile63.64%Participants45Observations7.4KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank18ModelXIMiMo-V2.6-ProXiaomiAgent Score4.23% (3.17% - 5.30%)Percentile61.36%Participants45Observations148.5KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank19ModelGOGemini 3.1 ProGoogleAgent Score3.31% (-1.04% - 7.66%)Percentile59.09%Participants45Observations14.8KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank20ModelTMInklingThinking Machines LabAgent Score2.71% (-2.09% - 7.52%)Percentile56.82%Participants45Observations7KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank21ModelMEMuse Spark 1.3MetaAgent Score2.42% (1.50% - 3.34%)Percentile54.55%Participants45Observations328.8KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank22ModelDEDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813DeepSeekAgent Score2.36% (1.06% - 3.66%)Percentile52.27%Participants45Observations79.6KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank23ModelOPGPT-5.6 TerraOpenAIAgent Score2.32% (-0.17% - 4.81%)Percentile50.00%Participants45Observations26.7KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank24ModelMIMiniMax M3MiniMaxAgent Score2.29% (0.14% - 4.44%)Percentile47.73%Participants45Observations33.1KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank25ModelMAMistral Large 4Mistral AIAgent Score2.14% (-0.12% - 4.40%)Percentile45.45%Participants45Observations43KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank26ModelACQwen3.8 MaxAlibaba Cloud / Qwen TeamAgent Score1.43% (0.66% - 2.21%)Percentile43.18%Participants45Observations244.1KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank27ModelXIMiMo-V2.5-ProXiaomiAgent Score0.96% (-1.22% - 3.14%)Percentile40.91%Participants45Observations33KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank28ModelGOGemini 3.6 FlashGoogleAgent Score0.52% (-2.26% - 3.29%)Percentile38.64%Participants45Observations22KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank29ModelACQwen3.7-PlusAlibaba Cloud / Qwen TeamAgent Score-0.64% (-6.02% - 4.74%)Percentile36.36%Participants45Observations12.1KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026
Rank30ModelXAGrok 4.5xAIAgent Score-1.21% (-3.46% - 1.04%)Percentile34.09%Participants45Observations20.7KEvidenceAEvaluatedOct 14, 2026

LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq Highlights

The leading models and scores on this benchmark.

LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq Score Distribution

A closer view of the leading scores on this benchmark.

LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq

The Top AI Models for LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq

The first five results on this benchmark, with official price and output speed added where the model identity can be matched.

What is LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq?

What LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq measures and how its scores work.

LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq is a benchmark with a current leaderboard.

It reports Agent Score as a ratio.

Scores are shown in ratio. This benchmark is verified and has an evidence level of A.

Family
lm-arena-agent-bash-reliability-no-prereq
Modality
Unspecified
Primary category
Unspecified
Score direction
higher
LLMBoard eligible
No
Evaluation key
overall

LM Arena. Benchmark scores retain their original unit. Overall score eligibility is shown separately.

FAQ

Common questions about LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq.

Which model scores highest on LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq?

Claude Opus 4.8 is currently ranked first with 15.74%.

What are the top three models on LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq?

The current leaders are Claude Opus 4.8 (15.74%), Claude Sonnet 5 (15.57%), and GPT-5.5 (13.33%).

Which LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq model has the lowest official input price?

Claude Haiku 5.5 has the lowest matched official input price at $0.10 input / $0.50 output per 1M tokens.

Which models are fastest among LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq results?

The fastest matched records are Gemini 3.7 Flash (409.96 tok/s via Google), GPT-5.6 Luna (215.52 tok/s via OpenAI), and Gemini 3.1 Pro (90.00 tok/s via Google).

Does the highest agent score result prove overall model quality?

No. This benchmark measures one defined capability or task. The overall LLMBoard score uses a separate aggregation across eligible benchmark evidence.

What does LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq measure?

It reports Agent Score as a ratio.

Is a higher agent score better?

Yes. Higher values rank better for this benchmark.

How many models are compared?

45 model results are currently shown.

Does this benchmark affect the overall score?

No. This benchmark is shown for reference but does not contribute to the overall score.

Rank #1Claude Opus 4.815.74% (13.50% - 17.98%)
Rank #2Claude Sonnet 515.57% (14.52% - 16.62%)
Rank #3GPT-5.513.33% (11.83% - 14.83%)
Rank #4Claude Fable 512.87% (11.21% - 14.52%)

Ranking basisThis lm arena agent bash reliability no prereq AI model leaderboard uses descending agent score in the benchmark original unit. The leaderboard ranking keeps matched price and speed data separate from benchmark evidence.

  1. 01
    AN
    Claude Opus 4.8Anthropic
    Agent Score
    15.74%
    Price
    $5.0 input / $25 output per 1M tokens
    Speed
    Up to 42.00 tok/s via Vertex AI

    Strengths

    • Ranks #1 of 45 compared models
    • 100th percentile on this benchmark
    • A evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq, not total model capability
  2. 02
    AN
    Claude Sonnet 5Anthropic
    Agent Score
    15.57%
    Price
    $2.0 input / $10 output per 1M tokens
    Speed
    Up to 42.00 tok/s via Anthropic

    Strengths

    • Ranks #2 of 45 compared models
    • 98th percentile on this benchmark
    • A evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq, not total model capability
  3. 03
    OP
    OpenAI
    Agent Score
    13.33%
    Price
    $5.0 input / $30 output per 1M tokens

    Strengths

    • Ranks #3 of 45 compared models
    • 95th percentile on this benchmark
    • A evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq, not total model capability
  4. 04
    AN
    Anthropic
    Agent Score
    12.87%
    Price
    $10 input / $50 output per 1M tokens

    Strengths

    • Ranks #4 of 45 compared models
    • 93th percentile on this benchmark
    • A evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq, not total model capability
  5. 05
    OP
    OpenAI
    Agent Score
    11.91%
    Price
    $4.0 input / $20 output per 1M tokens
    Speed
    Up to 25.46 tok/s via OpenAI

    Strengths

    • Ranks #5 of 45 compared models
    • 91th percentile on this benchmark
    • A evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq, not total model capability

Selection summary

Best AI Models for LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq

Claude Opus 4.8 currently leads LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability No Prereq with 15.74%. It is the top model on this specific benchmark, while the best LLM for the broader task should also be checked against other benchmarks, price, and runtime.

Use this leaderboard with the supporting benchmark results and coverage details above. A leaderboard position summarizes the selected ranking signal; it does not replace workload-specific testing.

GPT-5.5
Claude Fable 5
GPT-5.6 Sol
Benchmark rank #1Claude Opus 4.815.74% · $5.0 input / $25 output per 1M tokens
Benchmark rank #2Claude Sonnet 515.57% · $2.0 input / $10 output per 1M tokens
Benchmark rank #3GPT-5.513.33% · $5.0 input / $30 output per 1M tokens