Open Source LLM Leaderboard
Track benchmark rankings for open-weight and open-source AI models, then compare score, size, and license signals in one place.
Per-Benchmark Rankings
Filter by math, coding, agent, and more. Switch benchmarks below or jump into a category leaderboard for the full ranking. View all benchmarks.
Recommended models
Ranked by MATH-500LLM Performance Results
Data source: DataLearnerAIClick any row to open the model page. Tick the checkboxes to compare up to 4 models side by side. Scores shown are the best result across all evaluation modes.
Leaderboard FAQ
Which open-source models appear on this leaderboard?
The leaderboard tracks open-weight or publicly available models — including Llama, Qwen, DeepSeek, Mistral, GLM, and other releases whose weights or code are available under tracked licenses. It may include permissive, non-commercial, or otherwise restricted licenses; closed-weight API-only models such as GPT or Claude are excluded here.
Why do scores for the same model differ across benchmarks?
Each benchmark measures a different capability — reasoning (HLE, ARC-AGI-2), math (AIME, FrontierMath), coding (SWE-bench Verified), agent use (τ²-Bench), and so on. A model tuned for one capability may perform very differently on another, which is exactly why we surface per-benchmark scores rather than a single number.
How often is the leaderboard updated?
Data is revalidated every 5 minutes, and new models or evaluation results are added as soon as they are published. The "Updated on" indicator at the top of the page reflects the most recent data refresh.
How should I read the composite ranking?
The composite view aggregates a model's standing across multiple core benchmarks. It is a useful first filter, but for production decisions you should drill into the specific benchmark closest to your workload — for example, SWE-bench Verified for coding agents, or τ²-Bench for tool-use scenarios.
Can I run these open-source models locally?
Most listed models publish weights on Hugging Face or GitHub and can be served via vLLM, Ollama, llama.cpp, or similar runtimes. Hardware requirements scale with parameter count — a 7B model fits on a single consumer GPU, while 65B+ models typically need multi-GPU or quantized deployment.
Composite Rankings
There is no single, universally agreed-upon comprehensive AI model ranking, so we selected two representative leaderboards that approach the question from different angles. Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index aggregates scores from 10 standardized benchmarks (coding, math, reasoning, etc.) to measure objective capability. LMArena (formerly Chatbot Arena) ranks models by Elo ratings derived from anonymous crowd-sourced A/B voting, reflecting real-world user preference. Together they offer both an objective and a subjective perspective.
AA Intelligence Index
Full rankingComposite of 10 standardized benchmarks across coding, math, science, reasoning, and agentic tasks.
Updated 2026-09-08
LMArena Text Generation
Full rankingElo ratings from anonymous crowdsourced A/B voting, reflecting real user preference for response quality.
Updated 2026-09-02

Leading model developers
View all 101 organizationsJump to a developer to explore its full model lineup, series, and product lines.
阿里巴巴
OpenAI
Google Deep Mind
Facebook AI研究实验室
智谱AI
DeepSeek-AI
MistralAI
Google Research
Microsoft Azure
Anthropic
百度
Stability AI
字节跳动Seed团队Model comparisons
Head-to-head write-ups: what the benchmark gap actually means, and which model fits which job.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 与 DeepSeek V4 Flash 怎么选?限时预览与成熟 API 版本对比
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 是限时 API 预览版,官方确认其原生多模态,但暂未公开独立评测与完整规格;DeepSeek V4 Flash 则已有 1M 上下文、284B MoE、开源权重和 0731 API 版本的 Agent 评测。若生产工作负载需要稳定接口、可复现实测或本地部署,应优先 V4 Flash;V4.1 Flash 更适合在有效期内做隔离试用,不应仅因版本号更高就默认替换现有方案。
GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-5.6 Sol:按评测版本、测试配置与任务成本比较
更新至 2026-09-05 核验快照:AA Coding Agent Index v1.4 的 Codex max 对照为 67 对 65,Sol 历史 80 分不与新版本混比。Astra 在多项官方 Agent 和长上下文评测领先,但 AA 编程测试中也有 Sol 更强的子项及更短的耗时。标准 token 单价相差 2.5 倍,不等于任务账单相差 2.5 倍。
GPT-6 Astra对比Claude Fable 5.1,谁更强,哪个价格更有优势
GPT-6 Astra 与 Claude Fable 5.1 是 OpenAI 和 Anthropic 在 2026 年推出的两款旗舰级模型,两者都面向复杂推理、编程、Agent 和长时程知识工作。从目前可直接对比的 8 项评测来看,GPT-6 Astra 以 5 项领先、3 项落后的成绩取得小幅整体优势,在 ARC-AGI、AutomationBench、Terminal-Bench 及科学工具任务上表现更突出;Claude Fable 5.1 则在 HLE、AA Intelligence Index 和 OSWorld 2.0 等知识推理与计算机操作评测中占优。两款模型均提供约 100 万 token 上下文和 128K 最大输出,API 基础价格也同为每百万 token 输入 10 美元、输出 50 美元,因此实际选型更取决于任务类型、Agent 工作流以及缓存使用方式,而非单纯的价格或综合分数。
Claude Fable 5.1 / Fable 5 / Opus 5 与 GPT-5.6 Sol 四方对比:评测、价格与选型
四款模型共有的 4 项 0–100 量表评测里,Fable 5.1 平均 58.8 分居首,Opus 5 50.3、Fable 5 46.7、GPT-5.6 Sol 42.5;计算机操作(OSWorld 2.0 partial)上 Fable 5.1 以 77.9 对 75.4 小幅领先 Opus 5,但它的价格是 Opus 5 的两倍、Sol 的 2.5 倍。
Explore more
The leaderboard covers benchmarked models. Browse the full catalog by model, organization, or benchmark.
Browse every tracked model — filter by organization, type, and release date, not just benchmark scores.
BrowseExplore the labs and companies behind these models and their full model lineups.
BrowseDive into each benchmark — what it measures, how it scores, and the full ranking.
Browse











