agents benchmark
FrontierSWE evaluates whether an agent can complete open-ended technical projects spanning systems optimization, large-scale code construction, and applied ML research over hours to tens of hours.
Updated Sep 7, 2026
Higher score ranks better on this benchmark.
Rank | Model | Score | Percentile | Participants | Evidence | Evaluated |
|---|
| Rank01 | ModelAN | Score90.00% | Percentile100.00% | Participants16 | EvidenceB | Evaluated |
| Rank02 | ModelMA | Score81.20% | Percentile93.33% | Participants16 | EvidenceC | Evaluated |
| Rank03 | ModelZA | Score78.10% | Percentile86.67% | Participants16 | EvidenceC | Evaluated |
| Rank04 | ModelAN | Score75.00% | Percentile80.00% | Participants16 | EvidenceB | Evaluated |
| Rank05 | ModelZA | Score74.00% | Percentile73.33% | Participants16 | EvidenceB | Evaluated |
| Rank06 | ModelAC | Score73.50% | Percentile66.67% | Participants16 | EvidenceC | Evaluated |
| Rank07 | ModelOP | Score73.00% | Percentile60.00% | Participants16 | EvidenceB | Evaluated |
| Rank08 | ModelAN | Score63.00% | Percentile53.33% | Participants16 | EvidenceB | Evaluated |
| Rank09 | ModelAN | Score56.00% | Percentile46.67% | Participants16 | EvidenceB | Evaluated |
| Rank10 | ModelOP | Score54.00% | Percentile40.00% | Participants16 | EvidenceB | Evaluated |
| Rank11 | ModelGO | Score40.00% | Percentile33.33% | Participants16 | EvidenceB | Evaluated |
| Rank12 | ModelZA | Score31.00% | Percentile26.67% | Participants16 | EvidenceB | Evaluated |
| Rank13 | ModelDE | Score29.00% | Percentile20.00% | Participants16 | EvidenceB | Evaluated |
| Rank14 | ModelMA | Score27.00% | Percentile13.33% | Participants16 | EvidenceB | Evaluated |
| Rank15 | ModelMA | Score26.00% | Percentile6.67% | Participants16 | EvidenceB | Evaluated |
| Rank16 | ModelAC | Score22.00% | Percentile0.00% | Participants16 | EvidenceB | Evaluated |
The leading models and scores on this benchmark.
A closer view of the leading scores on this benchmark.
The first five results on this benchmark, with official price and output speed added where the model identity can be matched.
What FrontierSWE measures and how its scores work.
FrontierSWE is an agents benchmark for open-ended technical projects at the scale of hours to tens of hours.
It measures agent performance on systems optimization, large-scale code construction, and applied ML research, reported as a dominance score where higher is better.
Scores are shown in ratio. This benchmark is not independently verified and has an evidence level of B.
LLM Stats. Benchmark scores retain their original unit. Overall score eligibility is shown separately.
Common questions about FrontierSWE.
Claude Fable 5 is currently ranked first with 90.00%.
The current leaders are Claude Fable 5 (90.00%), Kimi K3 (81.20%), and GLM-5.3 (78.10%).
Qwen3.6 Plus has the lowest matched official input price at $0.50 input / $3.0 output per 1M tokens.
The fastest matched records are GLM-5.3 (472.69 tok/s via FriendliAI), GPT-5.5 (134.94 tok/s via OpenAI), and Claude Opus 4.6 (123.15 tok/s via Anthropic).
No. This benchmark measures one defined capability or task. The overall LLMBoard score uses a separate aggregation across eligible benchmark evidence.
It measures agent performance on systems optimization, large-scale code construction, and applied ML research, reported as a dominance score where higher is better.
Yes. Higher values rank better for this benchmark.
16 model results are currently shown.
No. This benchmark is shown for reference but does not contribute to the overall score.
Ranking basisThis frontierswe AI model leaderboard uses descending score in the benchmark original unit. The leaderboard ranking keeps matched price and speed data separate from benchmark evidence.
Selection summary
Claude Fable 5 currently leads FrontierSWE with 90.00%. 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.