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

agents benchmark

Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA Leaderboard

Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA reports accuracy on terminal tasks with executable final-container-state verifiers.

Updated Oct 23, 2026

Models4
Model coverage4
MetricScore
EvidenceB

On this page

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

Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA Ranking

Higher score ranks better on this benchmark.

4 rows
Columns

Show columns

Sort by
Rank
Model
Score
Percentile
Participants
Evidence
Evaluated
Rank01ModelMEMuse Wonder FullMetaScore57.10%Percentile100.00%Participants4EvidenceCEvaluatedOct 22, 2026
Rank02ModelMEMuse Wonder FullMetaScore57.10%Percentile66.67%Participants4EvidenceCEvaluatedOct 22, 2026
Rank03ModelMEMuse WonderMetaScore52.00%Percentile33.33%Participants4EvidenceCEvaluatedOct 22, 2026
Rank04ModelMEMuse WonderMetaScore52.00%Percentile0.00%Participants4EvidenceCEvaluatedOct 22, 2026

Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA Highlights

The leading models and scores on this benchmark.

Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA Score Distribution

A closer view of the leading scores on this benchmark.

Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA

The Top AI Models for Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA

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

What is Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA?

What Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA measures and how its scores work.

Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA is an agents benchmark for terminal tasks with executable final-container-state verifiers.

It measures accuracy, reported as Score in ratio units.

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

Family
Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA
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 Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA.

Which model scores highest on Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA?

Muse Wonder Full is currently ranked first with 57.10%.

What are the top three models on Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA?

The current leaders are Muse Wonder Full (57.10%), Muse Wonder Full (57.10%), and Muse Wonder (52.00%).

Which Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA model has the lowest official input price?

Muse Wonder has the lowest matched official input price at $4.0 input / $20 output per 1M tokens.

Which models are fastest among Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA results?

No matched runtime record is currently available.

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 Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA measure?

It measures accuracy, reported as Score in ratio units.

Is a higher score better?

Yes. Higher values rank better for this benchmark.

How many models are compared?

4 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 #1Muse Wonder Full57.10%
Rank #2Muse Wonder Full57.10%
Rank #3Muse Wonder52.00%
Rank #4Muse Wonder52.00%

Ranking basisThis terminal-bench 4.0-aa 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
    ME
    Muse Wonder FullMeta
    Score
    57.10%

    Strengths

    • Ranks #1 of 4 compared models
    • 100th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA, not total model capability
  2. 02
    ME
    Muse Wonder FullMeta
    Score
    57.10%

    Strengths

    • Ranks #2 of 4 compared models
    • 67th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA, not total model capability
  3. 03
    ME
    Meta
    Score
    52.00%
    Price
    $4.0 input / $20 output per 1M tokens

    Strengths

    • Ranks #3 of 4 compared models
    • 33th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA, not total model capability
  4. 04
    ME
    Meta
    Score
    52.00%
    Price
    $4.0 input / $20 output per 1M tokens

    Strengths

    • Ranks #4 of 4 compared models
    • 0th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA, not total model capability

Selection summary

Best AI Models for Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA

Muse Wonder Full currently leads Terminal-Bench 4.0-AA with 57.10%. 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.

Muse Wonder
Muse Wonder
Benchmark rank #1Muse Wonder Full57.10%
Benchmark rank #2Muse Wonder Full57.10%
Benchmark rank #3Muse Wonder52.00% · $4.0 input / $20 output per 1M tokens