📡 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 (18 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: 0.5

contextWindow: 262144

inputPrice: 0.26

outputPrice: 2.08

benchmarkMmlu: 88

benchmarkHumanEval: 89

benchmarkMath: 89

benchmarkHellaSwag: 89

benchmarkGpqa: 62

benchmarkMmluPro: 66

reasoningScore: 67

codingScore: 78

aaIntelligenceIndex: 16

aaCostPerTask: 0.32

aaOutputSpeed: 127

aaLatency: 18.83

aaEndToEndTime: 21.92

Qwen: Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

qwen🔒 Proprietary

Published Artificial Analysis leaderboard evidence.

LLM Stats Scores

67.0

Reasoning

78.0

Coding

🎯

62.0%GPQA Diamond — graduate-level science accuracy

66.0%MMLU-Pro

Published benchmark evidence

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

View HLE source ↗

25.2%

Humanity's Last Exam

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

$0.32

AA measured

Output speed

127

tokens / second

TTFT

18.83s

AA measured

Response time

21.92s

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

134

tokens / second

TTFT

17.24s

BenchLM measured

Collected 11/11/2026

Quality Score

73.0

Overall (0–100)

Speed

80 c/s

characters/second

Latency (TTFT)

0.50s

to first token

Input Price

$0.26

per 1M tokens

Output Price

$2.08

per 1M tokens

Context Window

262K

tokens

Release Date

2026-02-25

30-Day Rank History

📊 Benchmark Scores

Reported scores · % accuracy

What do these benchmarks test?

🎯

GPQA Diamond62.0%Below avg

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.

📚

MMLU-Pro66.0%Solid

The harder successor to MMLU — more options per question eliminate single-answer guessing. Tests depth of professional knowledge across 14 disciplines.

🧠

MMLU88.0%Top tier

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

💻

HumanEval89.0%Solid

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

∑

MATH Benchmark89.0%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%.

🌐

HellaSwag89.0%Solid

Tests grounded, everyday common sense rather than memorised facts. Most frontier models now score 90%+, so it best separates small/mid models from large ones.