AIEvals

Benchmarks

GDPval-AA v2.1

Whether a model can deliver economically valuable knowledge work of the kind that makes up real professional output.

Knowledge workArtificial Analysis188 models run by Artificial AnalysisUpdated 8 October 2026Reported by Anthropic, Anthropic, Anthropic, Anthropic

How it is run

Artificial Analysis independently evaluates professional work and reports Elo ratings. The independent table uses the highest published effort per model release, with its snapshot date shown in the table. Original vendor comparisons remain separate below.

What it cannot tell you

The unit is a score, not a percentage, so it belongs in its own row and must never be averaged with the percentage rows. Artificial Analysis runs it, Anthropic publishes its own models' rows and quotes the others, and Anthropic says a structured-output bug in the pre-release Sonnet 5.5 deployment may understate its figure.

Leader
Claude Opus 5.51,846.17 · Artificial Analysis results, grouped here by release
Top-ten spread
205.39Leader minus tenth place, or last place in smaller fields.
Median
765.14of the 188 rows published
No published result
4of 46 models on this site

Artificial Analysis results by release

Highest published effort per model release, grouped here from AA’s public results. Grouping ranks are derived here; source settings and model-publisher reports stay separate.

#ModelScoreEffort
1Claude Opus 5.51,846.17max
2Claude Sonnet 5.51,844.21max
3Claude Fable 5.11,734.67max
4Claude Opus 51,707.92max
5Grok 4.71,695.21xhigh
6MiMo-V2.6-Pro1,678.29Not specified
7Muse Spark 1.31,672.33max
8Qwen3.8 Max (0902)1,663.25Not specified
9GLM-5.31,643.62max
10GLM 5.3 Flash1,640.78max
11Grok 4.61,632.22xhigh
12Claude Haiku 5.51,620.05max
13Qwen3.8-Flash-Next1,612.13Not specified
14Gemini 4 Argon1,611.33high
15MiMo-V2.6-Flash1,600.06Not specified
16DeepSeek V4.1 Flash1,600max
17Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B1,597.27Not specified
18Qwen3.8 Max1,595.53Not specified
19Claude Fable 51,595.41max
20GPT-5.6 Sol1,587.9max
21GPT-6.1 Sol1,575.09max
22Step 5 Preview1,566.12Not specified
23GPT-6 Astra1,541.89max
24Kimi K31,539.99max
25DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision1,534.42max
26GPT-6 Sol1,505.22max
27Muse Spark 1.21,481.62xhigh
28GPT-5.6 Luna1,463.23max
29Claude Sonnet 51,449.2max
30DeepSeek V4 Pro 08131,441.42max
31GPT-6 Luna1,438.38max
32Claude Opus 4.81,438.32max
33GPT-5.6 Terra1,432.27max
34DeepSeek V4 Flash 07311,426.57max
35Gemini 3.8 Flash1,411.95high
36Qwen3.8 27B1,410.85xhigh
37Gemini 3.7 Flash1,371.25high
38Grok 4.51,370.44high
39GLM-5.21,357.52max
40K2 Horizon 375B A23B1,349.2Not specified
41Claude Opus 4.71,338.42max
42GPT-5.51,335.89xhigh
43JT-4.1 Flash 236B A21B1,316.09Not specified
44Gemini 3.6 Flash1,264.67high
45MiniMax-M31,245.83Not specified
46GPT-5.41,232.67xhigh
47Claude Sonnet 4.61,219.72max
48Muse Spark 1.11,208.36xhigh
49Apodex 1.11,188.58Not specified
50Gemini 3.5 Flash1,184.8high
51K2 Horizon MoVA 36B A4B1,181.28Not specified
52Quasar 438B1,161.58max
53Ling-3.0-flash-VL1,149.89Not specified
54DeepSeek V4 Pro 04241,144.37max
55Motif 31,118.66Not specified
56Qwen3.7 Max1,114.28Not specified
57Inkling Small1,108.58Not specified
58MiMo-V2.5-Pro1,107.02Not specified
59GLM-5.11,103.36Not specified
60Ling-3.0-flash-Fin1,092.94Not specified
61Nex-N2-Pro1,091.44Not specified
62Motif 3 (Beta)1,086.46Not specified
63Solar Mini 41,071.83Not specified
64Inkling1,063.67xhigh
65Grok Build 0.1 06161,051.91Not specified
66Hy31,045.12Not specified
67Kimi K2.61,026.09Not specified
68Kimi K2.7 Code1,025.04Not specified
69DeepSeek V4 Flash 04201,023max
70K2 Horizon 7B1,011.4Not specified
71Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B1,000.35Not specified
72GPT-5.4 mini1,000.22xhigh
73GLM-4.7999.79Not specified
74MiniMax-M2.7998.64Not specified
75MiMo-V2.5986.21Not specified
76Muse Spark985.78Not specified
77Qwen3.6 Plus975.84Not specified
78Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite969.52high
79A.X-K2953.52Not specified
80Qwen3.6 27B949.9Not specified
81Ling 3.0 Flash940.66Not specified
82GPT-5.4 nano936.65xhigh
83Grok 4.3923.21high
84GPT-5905.76high
85Claude 4.5 Sonnet892.87Not specified
86K2 Horizon 3.7B864.58Not specified
87LongCat 2.0856.19Not specified
88Step 3.7 Flash844.83high
89Qwen3.6 35B A3B837.35Not specified
90Kimi K2.5824.06Not specified
91GPT-5.1812.62high
92Qwen3.5 397B A17B779.56Not specified
93Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview775.98Not specified
94Muse Glimmer774.24high
95Qwen3.7 Plus756.04Not specified
96GPT-5 mini753.88high
97Mistral Medium 3.5747.1high
98GLM-4.6745.95Not specified
99Ring-2.6-1T733.6xhigh
100KAT Coder Pro V2719.81Not specified
101Claude 4.5 Haiku718.86Not specified
102KAT-Coder-Pro V1718.33Not specified
103DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus698.18Not specified
104Qwen3.5 122B A10B694.76Not specified
105MiniCPM5-2B694.27Not specified
106DeepSeek V3.2680.82Not specified
107Claude 4 Sonnet679.76Not specified
108Nemotron 3.5 Lightning624.22Not specified
109MiMo-V2-Flash614.52Not specified
110Gemma 4 31B613.85Not specified
111gpt-oss-120b595.5high
112Qwen3.5 35B A3B594.66Not specified
113Granite 4.2 30B563.74Not specified
114Ling 3.0 Tiny554.78Not specified
115Gemma 4 26B A4B552.93Not specified
116Devstral 2531.38Not specified
117Devstral Small 2515.72Not specified
118Qwen3 Coder Next500.99Not specified
119Command A+500.03Not specified
120GPT-5.5 Instant (June 2026)496.46Not specified
121Mercury 2481.29high
122Granite 4.2 8B478.17Not specified
123Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B477.33Not specified
124Mercury 2.5461.62Not specified
125EXAONE 4.5 33B457.46Not specified
126Nova 2.0 Pro Preview456.17medium
127Gemini 2.5 Pro443.74Not specified
128HyperNova 60B 2605435.56high
129Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite416.1high
130Qwen3.5 9B413.53Not specified
131Gemma 4 12B413.05Not specified
132Mistral Large 3406.23Not specified
133Mistral Medium 3.1371.38Not specified
134Mistral Small 3.1363.45Not specified
135K-EXAONE356.68Not specified
136Nova 2.0 Lite353.59high
137Mistral Small 4349.39Not specified
138gpt-oss-20b326.46high
139Trinity Large Thinking323.56Not specified
140DiffusionGemma 26B A4B307.68Not specified
141Ling 2.6 Flash306.4Not specified
142Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 (Reasoning)301.95Not specified
143North Mini Code298.56Not specified
144Celeris-1288.39Not specified
145DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25)282.28Not specified
146GPT-4.1 mini255.91Not specified
147Nemotron Cascade 2 30B A3B252.13Not specified
148Solar Pro 3251.24high
149Ministral 3 14B233.93Not specified
150o3-mini218.41high
151Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning215.77Not specified
152Ministral 3 8B200.44Not specified
153Claude 3.5 Haiku197.5Not specified
154Granite 4.2 3B188.21Not specified
155Granite 4.1 30B175.36Not specified
156Magistral Medium 1.2154.65Not specified
157K2 Think V2117.3high
158Qwen3 Next 80B A3B (Reasoning)113.86Not specified
159DeepSeek V3 032456.25Not specified
160Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 (Reasoning)54.44Not specified
161Qwen3 32B19.44Not specified
162Ministral 3 3B15.05Not specified
163Magistral Small 1.2-10.32Not specified
164LFM2.5-2.6B-22.23Not specified
165Gemma 4 E4B-32.23Not specified
166GPT-4-34.68Not specified
167GPT-4o mini-36.61Not specified
168Qwen3 14B-38.78Not specified
169DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24)-44.14Not specified
170NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 4B-55.77Not specified
171Qwen3 8B-62.93Not specified
172Granite 4.1 3B-160.24Not specified
173Llama 4 Scout-177.98Not specified
174Llama 3.3 Instruct 70B-189.09Not specified
175Gemma 4 E2B-203.46Not specified
176Mistral Small 3.2-211.71Not specified
177GPT-4.1 nano-228.34Not specified
178Llama 4 Maverick-290.78Not specified
179NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B-372.92Not specified
180Qwen3.5 2B-382.42Not specified
181MiniCPM-V 4.6 1.3B-385.53Not specified
182Qwen3.5 0.8B-385.66Not specified
183Llama 3.1 Instruct 8B-402.88Not specified
184Nanbeige4.1-3B-420.24Not specified
185Gemma 3 12B Instruct-424.36Not specified
186Gemma 3 27B Instruct-424.39Not specified
187Phi-4 Mini Instruct-424.65Not specified
188K2 Horizon 0.9B-425.59Not specified

No published result tracked

4 of the 46 models on this site have no published number on this benchmark, so their cells in the home table stay blank rather than reading as zero.

Read this with

Other versions of the same evaluation. Versions are not comparable: the task set changes between them.

As reported by each publisher

The same benchmark, measured by the labs themselves. Compare down a column, never across two publishers.

Anthropic

Claude Haiku 5.5: launch evaluation table · 7 October 2026

RankModelScore (score)
2Claude Haiku 5.51,620
4Claude Haiku 4.5735
3GPT-6 Luna1,437
1Claude Sonnet 5.51,840

Ranks compare reported scores in the same published row; ties share a rank.

GDPval-AA v2.1 (max). Elo from Artificial Analysis, quoted by Anthropic.

All eight results and four comparison columns from Anthropic’s announcement, read 8 October 2026. Haiku 5.5 uses max effort; Sonnet’s FrontierCode uses xhigh. HLE is split into no-tools and with-tools rows. OSWorld uses partial credit on the official 82-task offline subset, differing from earlier combined-subset reports. AA ran GDPval-AA and AA-Briefcase; these rounded quotes from Anthropic remain separate from the directly imported public AA measurements. GPT results retain the source and configuration described in the system card. Missing cells stay blank; the reported Haiku 4.5 Terminal-Bench score is zero. Each rank compares one published row only.

www.anthropic.com/claude-haiku-5-5

Anthropic

Claude Haiku 5.5: system card capability evaluations · 7 October 2026

RankRowModelScore (score)
2GDPval-AA v2.1 (max)Claude Haiku 5.51,620
5GDPval-AA v2.1 (max)Claude Haiku 4.5735
1GDPval-AA v2.1 (max)Claude Sonnet 5.51,840
3GDPval-AA v2.1 (max)GPT-6 Luna1,437
4GDPval-AA v2.1 (max)Gemini 3.8 Flash1,435
1GDPval-AA v2.1 (medium)Claude Haiku 5.51,277

Ranks compare reported scores in the same published row; ties share a rank.

GDPval-AA v2.1 (max). §8.10.2: independent AA evaluation quoted by Anthropic; Elo anchored to DeepSeek V4.1 Flash max at 1600.

GDPval-AA v2.1 (medium). §8.10.2: default medium effort, about one tenth of max’s output tokens. Comparison-model medium figures are not stated.

Section 8, pages 111–139 of the Haiku 5.5 system card, read 8 October 2026. Values come from exact prose, tables and labelled figures. Unless specified, Haiku uses adaptive thinking at max effort and five trials with evaluation-specific context up to 1M. Each row retains its subset, metric, effort and source notes; no score is assigned to an unspecified SWE-Bench Pro version. Terminal runs use safeguards without fallback and no internet egress. ProgramBench uses filtered tasks and hidden-test pass rate without a time limit. OSWorld partial and strict results use the official 82-task offline subset. CAD uses 0–1 voxel IoU. Healthcare raw and length-adjusted scores stay separate. Life-science results disable Haiku biology safeguards. Independently run figures quoted by Anthropic remain publisher reports here. Missing comparison values are not inferred from rounded charts.

www.anthropic.com/claude-haiku-5-5-system-card

Anthropic

Claude Opus 5.5: evaluation table · 22 September 2026

RankModelScore (score)
1Claude Opus 5.51,846
2Claude Fable 5.11,735
3Claude Opus 51,708
5GPT-6 Astra1,542
4GPT-5.6 Sol1,588

Ranks compare reported scores in the same published row; ties share a rank.

Anthropic runs its own harness and states that margin size is a weakening guide to real differences at this level. Two rows rely on other publishers: AutomationBench figures come from Zapier, and the GPT figures are as reported by OpenAI. The Claude Opus 5.5 row was run with production safeguards enabled, so some security, biology and frontier-development tasks were completed by a fallback model.

www.anthropic.com/news/claude-opus-5-5

Anthropic

Claude Sonnet 5.5: evaluation table · 28 September 2026

RankModelScore (score)
2Claude Sonnet 5.51,844
4Claude Sonnet 51,449
1Claude Opus 5.51,846
3GPT-6 Sol1,487

Ranks compare reported scores in the same published row; ties share a rank.

GDPval-AA v2.1. A raw score, not a percentage. Artificial Analysis ran it; Anthropic says the pre-release Sonnet 5.5 deployment had a structured-output bug it expects to understate the figure, if it had any effect.

Anthropic publishes this table with Sonnet 5.5, the second model in its Claude 5.5 line, and states that Sonnet 5.5 at Max effort performs comparably to Opus 5.5 on several evaluations while Opus 5.5 remains stronger on open-ended work. The GPT-6 Sol column is quoted from OpenAI, not re-run, and Anthropic notes an OpenAI image-understanding bug that may not yet be reflected in third-party scores. Two rows come from other publishers: Artificial Analysis ran GDPval-AA and AA-Briefcase on a pre-release Sonnet 5.5 deployment that Anthropic later found had a structured-output bug, and Surge AI runs Chartography. Sonnet 5.5 launched with the cyber safeguards first built for Opus-class models, so some security work was completed by a fallback model.

www.anthropic.com/claude-sonnet-5-5

Sources

Every page used for this benchmark, read on 17 October 2026.