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
1224 models729 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

agents benchmark

CursorBench v3.2 Leaderboard

CursorBench v3.2 evaluates coding agents on interactive software engineering tasks in the Cursor environment.

Updated Sep 5, 2026

Models2
Model coverage2
MetricScore
EvidenceB

On this page

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

CursorBench v3.2 Ranking

Higher score ranks better on this benchmark.

2 rows
Columns

Show columns

Sort by
Rank
Model
Score
Percentile
Participants
Evidence
Evaluated
Rank01ModelANClaude Fable 5.1AnthropicScore73.40%Percentile100.00%Participants2EvidenceCEvaluatedSep 8, 2026
Rank02ModelXAGrok 4.6xAIScore69.90%Percentile0.00%Participants2EvidenceCEvaluatedSep 8, 2026

CursorBench v3.2 Highlights

The leading models and scores on this benchmark.

Rank #1Claude Fable 5.173.40%Rank #2Grok 4.669.90%

CursorBench v3.2 Score Distribution

A closer view of the leading scores on this benchmark.

CursorBench v3.2

The Top AI Models for CursorBench v3.2

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

What is CursorBench v3.2?

What CursorBench v3.2 measures and how its scores work.

CursorBench v3.2 is a benchmark for evaluating coding agents on interactive software engineering tasks in the Cursor environment.

It reports a Score measured as a ratio.

Scores are shown in ratio. This benchmark is not independently verified and has an evidence level of B.

Family
CursorBench v3.2
Modality
text
Primary category
agents
Score direction
higher
LLMBoard eligible
No
Evaluation key
overall

LLM Stats. Benchmark scores retain their original unit. Overall score eligibility is shown separately.

FAQ

Common questions about CursorBench v3.2.

Which model scores highest on CursorBench v3.2?

Claude Fable 5.1 is currently ranked first with 73.40%.

What are the top three models on CursorBench v3.2?

The current leaders are Claude Fable 5.1 (73.40%) and Grok 4.6 (69.90%).

Which CursorBench v3.2 model has the lowest official input price?

Grok 4.6 has the lowest matched official input price at $2.0 input / $6.0 output per 1M tokens.

Which models are fastest among CursorBench v3.2 results?

The fastest matched records are Grok 4.6 (132.69 tok/s via xAI) and Claude Fable 5.1 (7.67 tok/s via Anthropic).

Does the highest 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 CursorBench v3.2 measure?

It reports a Score measured as a ratio.

Is a higher score better?

Yes. Higher values rank better for this benchmark.

How many models are compared?

2 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.

Ranking basisThis cursorbench v3.2 AI model leaderboard uses descending score in the benchmark original unit. The leaderboard ranking keeps matched price and speed data separate from benchmark evidence.

  1. 01
    AN
    Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic
    Score
    73.40%
    Price
    $10 input / $50 output per 1M tokens
    Speed
    Up to 7.67 tok/s via Anthropic

    Strengths

    • Ranks #1 of 2 compared models
    • 100th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures CursorBench v3.2, not total model capability
  2. 02
    XA
    Grok 4.6xAI
    Score
    69.90%
    Price
    $2.0 input / $6.0 output per 1M tokens
    Speed
    Up to 132.69 tok/s via xAI

    Strengths

    • Ranks #2 of 2 compared models
    • 0th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures CursorBench v3.2, not total model capability

Selection summary

Best AI Models for CursorBench v3.2

Claude Fable 5.1 currently leads CursorBench v3.2 with 73.40%. 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.

Benchmark rank #1Claude Fable 5.173.40% · $10 input / $50 output per 1M tokens
Benchmark rank #2Grok 4.669.90% · $2.0 input / $6.0 output per 1M tokens