long context benchmark
InfiniteBench/En.MC is the English Multiple Choice variant of InfiniteBench, with 12 tasks spanning diverse domains and average data length surpassing 100K tokens.
Updated Sep 5, 2026
Higher score ranks better on this benchmark.
Rank | Model | Score | Percentile | Participants | Evidence | Evaluated |
|---|
| Rank01 | ModelME | Score63.30% | Percentile100.00% | Participants1 | EvidenceC | Evaluated |
The leading models and 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.
Ranking basisThis infinitebench/en.mc 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
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct currently leads InfiniteBench/En.MC with 63.30%. 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.
What InfiniteBench/En.MC measures and how its scores work.
InfiniteBench/En.MC is an English Multiple Choice benchmark variant for evaluating long-context capabilities across 12 tasks spanning diverse domains.
It measures long-context capabilities using the Score metric, reported as a ratio.
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 InfiniteBench/En.MC.
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct is currently ranked first with 63.30%.
The current leaders are Llama 3.2 3B Instruct (63.30%).
No matched official input price is currently available.
The fastest matched records are Llama 3.2 3B Instruct (171.50 tok/s via DeepInfra).
No. This benchmark measures one defined capability or task. The overall LLMBoard score uses a separate aggregation across eligible benchmark evidence.
It measures long-context capabilities using the Score metric, reported as a ratio.
Yes. Higher values rank better for this benchmark.
1 model results are currently shown.
No. This benchmark is shown for reference but does not contribute to the overall score.