LLM Reference

Benchmark Leaderboard

Top models by Massive Multitask Language Understanding score

Sorts are only valid inside this benchmark. A score gap of this benchmark does not map to the same gap on another benchmark, so validate any short-list by checking peer rows and model context/price fit.

#ModelScoreVersionSource
1Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview98MMLU (accuracy)https://automatio.ai/models/gemini-3-1-pro
2GPT-5.592.4MMLU (accuracy)https://tokenmix.ai/blog/gpt-5-5-spud-review-88-swe-bench-2026
3Claude Opus 4.691.1MMLU (accuracy)https://automatio.ai/models/claude-opus-4-6
4DeepSeek V4 Pro90.15-shothttps://api-docs.deepseek.com/news/news260424
5Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro89.4https://huggingface.co/XiaomiMiMo/MiMo-V2.5-Pro
6Claude Sonnet 4.689.3MMLU (accuracy)https://automatio.ai/models/claude-sonnet-4-6
7Claude 3 Opus88.75-shothttps://crfm.stanford.edu/helm/classic/latest/
8Claude 3.5 Sonnet88.75-shothttps://crfm.stanford.edu/helm/classic/latest/
9GPT-4o (05-13)88.75-shothttps://crfm.stanford.edu/helm/classic/latest/
10DeepSeek V4 Flash88.7MMLU EM, DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Base, 5-shothttps://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4-Flash
11Llama 3.1 405B88.65-shothttps://huggingface.co/spaces/open-llm-leaderboard/open_llm_leaderboard
12Llama 3.1 405B Instruct88.65-shothttps://huggingface.co/spaces/open-llm-leaderboard/open_llm_leaderboard
13DeepSeek V388.55-shothttps://huggingface.co/spaces/open-llm-leaderboard/open_llm_leaderboard
14Qwen2.5-72B-Instruct88.25-shothttps://huggingface.co/spaces/open-llm-leaderboard/open_llm_leaderboard
15Qwen3-Coder-Next87.73From official technical report arXiv:2603 (accuracy)https://arxiv.org/html/2603.00729v1
16Grok-287.55-shothttps://x.ai/blog/grok-2
17GPT-4 Turbo86.55-shothttps://openai.com/index/gpt-4-research/
18Qwen2.5-32B-Instruct86.15-shothttps://huggingface.co/spaces/open-llm-leaderboard/open_llm_leaderboard
19Qwen2.5-72B86.15-shothttps://qwenlm.github.io/blog/qwen2.5-llm/
20Llama 3.1 70B Instruct865-shothttps://huggingface.co/spaces/open-llm-leaderboard/open_llm_leaderboard

Interpretation

Trust when:

  • Use top rows for shortlisting, then validate provider coverage and feature fit before selecting a model.
  • Cross-benchmark consistency is a stronger signal than one-off score dominance.

Don't trust when:

  • Don't compare raw score gaps across different benchmark scales as equivalent.
  • Missing rows in the heatmap can hide benchmark blind spots.
  • No trend data means this is a snapshot; expect drift in fresh refresh cycles.

Cross-benchmark heatmap

Compare top models across selected benchmark families to spot strengths and weak spots. On narrow screens, scroll horizontally to inspect every benchmark.

ModelMMLUGPQAHumanEvalHellaSwag
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
98.0
94.3
94.0
GPT-5.5
92.4
93.6
94.2
Claude Opus 4.6
91.1
91.3
95.0
DeepSeek V4 Pro
90.1
90.1
76.8
Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro
89.4
66.7
Claude Sonnet 4.6
89.3
89.9
98.0