LLM Reference
activeCodingAgents

FrontierCode 1.1 Extended

Metric: Mean@5 score (higher is better)Introduced: 2026

Cognition's FrontierCode 1.1 Extended evaluation expands its mergeability-focused coding-agent methodology beyond the Main set. It reports the weighted code-quality and held-out-test mean@5 composite as a separate variant and must not be merged with FrontierCode Main.

Models ranked

1

tracked on this benchmark

Score band

63.6 – 63.6

best → lowest tracked

Snapshot trend

—

need ≥2 snapshots

Leaderboard

Tracked models ranked by Mean@5 score (higher is better).

Compare candidates
#Model variant and provenanceScore
1
Claude Opus 5

Configuration: Medium effort

Version: FrontierCode 1.1 ExtendedHarness: Cognition FrontierCode 1.1 weighted code-quality and held-out-test mean@5 evaluationEvaluator: CognitionObserved: Jul 24, 2026Confidence: confirmedSource

Notes: Source: p.151, Figure 8.4. Keep Extended separate from FrontierCode Main.

63.6

How to read this benchmark

This benchmark scores models where higher is better. Use scores for directional filtering and shortlisting, not universal quality ranking; then validate pricing, context window, provider availability, and fit for your workload.

Trust this score when

  • There is a fresh timestamped snapshot (or multiple snapshots) for this benchmark.
  • The model list covers the same version family you can actually deploy today.
  • Top candidates overlap with your required routing and feature requirements.

Be cautious when

  • There is only one benchmark snapshot or the dataset appears stale.
  • The benchmark metric direction is opposite of your decision objective.
  • The score difference between options is narrow and likely within implementation variance.

Related benchmarks

HumanEval
MBPP
Mostly Basic Programming Problems
HumanEval+
MBPP+
Mostly Basic Programming Problems+
Spider
ToolTalk

Last reviewed: Jul 26, 2026

Resources

WebsiteLeaderboard