📡 LLM Pulse|🆕 New on leaderboard: Baidu: ERNIE-Light-DT-1.0 by Baidu — $1.13/M tokensLearn more →1/10

Measurement sources and verification status (19 fields)

Collected third-party figures are not independent tests. A source link and collection date do not establish reproducibility. Exact model version, dataset and test settings may be missing. No independent verification date is supplied.

speed: 80

latency: 0.48

contextWindow: 1000000

inputPrice: 4

outputPrice: 20

benchmarkMmlu: 91.2

benchmarkHumanEval: 92.5

benchmarkMath: 94

benchmarkGpqa: 78.4

reasoningScore: 86

codingScore: 92.5

benchmarkHle: 67.7

benchmarkSweBench: 58.2

benchmarkAutoBench: 40

aaIntelligenceIndex: 59

aaCostPerTask: 0.55

aaOutputSpeed: 98

aaLatency: 4.21

aaEndToEndTime: 10.43

Anthropic: Claude Opus 5.5

anthropic🔒 Proprietary

LLM Stats Scores

86.0

Reasoning

92.5

Coding

🎯

78.4%GPQA Diamond — graduate-level science accuracy

Published benchmark evidence

Task scores are reported independently by each publisher; they are not combined into a hidden quality score.

67.7%

Humanity's Last Exam

58.2%

SWE-bench

40.0%

AutoBench

Artificial Analysis measurements

Published operational results. Cost per task, speed, and latency are kept separate from provider API prices.

View source ↗

Intelligence

AA Index

Cost / task

$0.55

AA measured

Output speed

tokens / second

TTFT

4.21s

AA measured

Response time

10.43s

end to end

Collected 11/11/2026

BenchLM performance measurements

Published output speed and first-token timing, kept separate from provider pricing and other benchmark sources.

View source ↗

Output speed

tokens / second

Collected 11/11/2026

Quality Score

89.0

Overall (0–100)

Speed

80 c/s

characters/second

Latency (TTFT)

0.48s

to first token

Input Price

per 1M tokens

Output Price

$20

per 1M tokens

Context Window

tokens

Release Date

2026-09-22

30-Day Rank History

📊 Benchmark Scores

Reported scores · % accuracy

What do these benchmarks test?

🎯

GPQA Diamond78.4%Solid

Designed so that even PhD-level human experts average ~65–70%. A score above 80% signals near-expert scientific reasoning that goes far beyond memorisation.

🧠

MMLU91.2%Top tier

The classic academic breadth benchmark. Top frontier models now score above 85%, so it best distinguishes mid-tier from strong generalist models.

💻

HumanEval92.5%Top tier

Measures whether a model writes functionally correct code — not just plausible-looking syntax. Strong scores (>85%) indicate reliable day-to-day coding assistance.

∑

MATH Benchmark94.0%Top tier

Tests multi-step mathematical reasoning under strict correctness. Even a 60% score requires strong chain-of-thought; top reasoning models now exceed 90%.