Benchmark Almanac

CRUXEval

Qwen3-Coder-Next 95.9% leads since February 2026
Claude 3 Opus 82% leads since February 2024
Qwen3-Coder-Next 95.9% leads since February 2026
Fading

Models predict the output of 800 short Python functions for a given input, or an input that yields a given output. Scored by pass@1.

Made by
Meta AI and MIT CSAIL
Released
January 2024
Kind
Function-level problems
Level
School
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Short answer
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
DeepSeek-V3 #154 on the capability index
Last in a launch post
April 2026, dropped after it saturated
Last model added
April 2026
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

We present CRUXEval (Code Reasoning, Understanding, and eXecution Evaluation), a benchmark consisting of 800 Python functions (3-13 lines). Each function comes with an input-output pair, leading to two natural tasks: input prediction and output prediction. First, we propose a generic recipe for generating our execution benchmark which can be used to create future variation of the benchmark. Second, we evaluate twenty code models on our benchmark and discover that many recent high-scoring models on HumanEval do not show the same improvements on our benchmark. Third, we show that simple CoT and fine-tuning schemes can improve performance on our benchmark but remain far from solving it. The best setup, GPT-4 with chain of thought (CoT), achieves a pass@1 of 75% and 81% on input and output prediction, respectively. In contrast, Code Llama 34B achieves a pass@1 of 50% and 46% on input and output prediction, highlighting the gap between open and closed source models. As no model is close to acing CRUXEval, we provide examples of consistent GPT-4 failures on simple programs as a lens into its code reasoning capabilities and areas for improvement.

Abstract of CRUXEval: A Benchmark for Code Reasoning, Understanding and Execution (arXiv:2401.03065, CC0)
9
Models scored in lab cards
7
Launch posts list it, from 5 labs
5
System cards report it, from 5 labs

Qwen3-Coder-Next leads with 95.9% among models released by April 2026

Best score per model as labs report them in their own cards. Labs pick their own settings, so these compare less cleanly than independent runs.

Claude 3 Opus leads with 82% across all independent runs

Best score per model across the official leaderboard, Epoch AI’s own runs and any board Epoch AI copied. Each bar and row names its source.

Qwen3-Coder-Next leads with 95.9%, claims included

Best score per model from every source, including labs’ own numbers and claims Epoch AI collected from reports and papers. Labs pick their own settings, so a claim can beat an independent run of the same model.

The newest model with a score here came out in April 2026, and nobody has reported a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 Qwen3-Coder-Next 95.9%
  2. 2 Code World Model (CWM) 94.3%
  3. 3 Falcon-H1-34B 73.1%
  4. 4 DeepSeek-V3 69.8%
  5. 5 DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) 61.5%
  6. 6 Granite 4.1 30B 55.8%
  7. 7 Codestral 55.5%
  8. 8 Granite 4.0 H Small 50.3%
  9. 9 granite-4.0-1b 33.1%

Source: Labs’ model cards

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Qwen3-Coder-Next 95.9% Feb 2026 Lab model card
2 Code World Model (CWM) 94.3% Sep 2025 Lab model card
3 Falcon-H1-34B 73.1% May 2025 Lab model card
4 DeepSeek-V3 69.8% Dec 2024 Lab model card
5 DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) 61.5% May 2024 Lab model card
6 Granite 4.1 30B 55.8% Apr 2026 Lab model card
7 Codestral 55.5% Jan 2025 Lab model card
8 Granite 4.0 H Small 50.3% Oct 2025 Lab model card
9 granite-4.0-1b 33.1% Oct 2025 Lab model card
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Claude 3 Opus 82% CoT Feb 2024 Official leaderboard
2 GPT-4 Turbo Apr 2024 82% CoT Apr 2024 Official leaderboard
3 GPT-4 Jun 2023 77.1% CoT Jun 2023 Official leaderboard
4 GPT-3.5 Turbo Jun 2023 59% CoT Jun 2023 Official leaderboard
5 StarCoder 2 15B 47.1% Feb 2024 Official leaderboard
6 Mixtral 8x7B 40.5% Dec 2023 Official leaderboard
7 StarCoder 2 7B 36% Feb 2024 Official leaderboard
8 Mistral 7B v0.1 34.3% Sep 2023 Official leaderboard
9 StarCoder 2 3B 34.2% Feb 2024 Official leaderboard
10 Phi-2 33.5% Dec 2023 Official leaderboard
11 Phi-1.5 27.5% Sep 2023 Official leaderboard
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Qwen3-Coder-Next 95.9% Feb 2026 Lab model card
2 Code World Model (CWM) 94.3% Sep 2025 Lab model card
3 Claude 3 Opus 82% CoT Feb 2024 Official leaderboard
4 GPT-4 Turbo Apr 2024 82% CoT Apr 2024 Official leaderboard
5 GPT-4 Jun 2023 77.1% CoT Jun 2023 Official leaderboard
6 Falcon-H1-34B 73.1% May 2025 Lab model card
7 DeepSeek-V3 69.8% Dec 2024 Lab model card
8 DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) 61.5% May 2024 Lab model card
9 GPT-3.5 Turbo Jun 2023 59% CoT Jun 2023 Official leaderboard
10 Granite 4.1 30B 55.8% Apr 2026 Lab model card
11 Codestral 55.5% Jan 2025 Lab model card
12 Granite 4.0 H Small 50.3% Oct 2025 Lab model card
13 StarCoder 2 15B 47.1% Feb 2024 Official leaderboard
14 Mixtral 8x7B 40.5% Dec 2023 Official leaderboard
15 StarCoder 2 7B 36% Feb 2024 Official leaderboard
16 Mistral 7B v0.1 34.3% Sep 2023 Official leaderboard
17 StarCoder 2 3B 34.2% Feb 2024 Official leaderboard
18 Phi-2 33.5% Dec 2023 Official leaderboard
19 granite-4.0-1b 33.1% Oct 2025 Lab model card
20 Phi-1.5 27.5% Sep 2023 Official leaderboard

The benchmark's own leaderboard has 35 entries, 11 of them models we track. Switch the scores above to rank them together.

Scores at each effort level

Models the leaderboard ran at two or more effort levels. We don’t have enough cost data here to say what the extra effort costs.

Lowest effort to highest, light to dark
Claude 3 Opus
CoT
82%
GPT-4 Turbo
CoT
82%
GPT-4
CoT
77.1%
GPT-3.5 Turbo
CoT
59%

Source: Official CRUXEval leaderboard

5 models have held number one in labs’ own numbers since its release in January 2024 2 models have held number one across all independent runs since its release in January 2024 4 models have held number one with claims included since its release in January 2024

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release. We draw one row each for the benchmark’s own leaderboard and what labs claim in their cards.

OpenAI Anthropic DeepSeek Technology Innovation Institute Meta Qwen
Own leaderboard Not tested since Apr 2024
Lab claims Passed 85% in Sep 2025, by Code World Model (CWM)

Sources: Official CRUXEval leaderboard and labs’ model cards

Meta’s own number for Code World Model (CWM) passed 85% in September 2025

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

On the benchmark’s own leaderboard Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2023 2024 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Qwen3-Coder-Next Claude 3 Opus GPT-4 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2023 2024 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Qwen3-Coder-Next Claude 3 Opus

Sources: Official CRUXEval leaderboard and labs’ model cards

Labs headline it less often now, last in April 2026

Launch posts from every lab that has listed it, one tick per post. Tall colored ticks include it, and short gray ones leave it out.

DeepSeek
Mistral AI
Qwen
Technology Innovation Institute
IBM
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
Apr 29, 2026 Granite 4.1 30B 55.8 CRUXEval-O (pass@1)
Oct 28, 2025 granite-4.0-1b 33.1 CRUXEval-O (pass@1)
Oct 2, 2025 Granite 4.0 H Small 50.3 CRUXEval-O (pass@1)
May 20, 2025 Falcon-H1-34B 73.1 CRUXEval
Jan 28, 2025 Qwen2.5-Max Best of CRUX-I / CRUX-O
Jan 13, 2025 Codestral 55.5 CruxEval
Dec 26, 2024 DeepSeek-V3 69.8 Best of CRUXEval-I (Acc.) / CRUXEval-O (Acc.)

5 system cards report it, from 5 labs

Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
Feb 28, 2026 Qwen3-Coder-Next technical report 95.9 CRUXEval (Table 6) Capabilities
Sep 30, 2025 Code World Model (CWM) technical report 94.3 CruxEval-output pass@1, language reasoning with CoT, full trace prediction 87.7 (Table 8). Non-reasoning CRUX-O 83.4 (Table 13) Capabilities
Jul 30, 2025 Falcon-H1-34B technical report 73.1 CRUXEval pass@1, input and output average (Table 24) Capabilities
Jun 4, 2025 Seed-Coder-8B-Instruct technical report CRUXEval Input-CoT 63.3, Output-CoT 67.1, no overall score (Table 12) Capabilities
May 7, 2024 DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) technical report 61.5 CRUXEval-I-COT 2-shot, DeepSeek-V2 Chat (RL) (Table 3) Capabilities

More in Coding

All 282 in Coding
  • SWE-bench Verified In use 500 human-validated GitHub issues from 12 Python repos. Agent writes a patch that must pass hidden tests. Claude Opus 4.7 83.5%
  • LiveCodeBench v6 In use Competitive programming problems collected after model cutoffs from LeetCode, AtCoder, Codeforces. Scored pass@1 on hidden tests. DeepSeek-V4-Pro 93.5%
  • SWE-bench Multilingual In use 300 GitHub-issue tasks across nine programming languages in SWE-bench format. Patch graded by repository tests. Claude Fable 5.2 96.6%
  • DeepSWE In use 113 original long-horizon engineering tasks across 91 repos and five languages, written from scratch. Hand-written verifiers accept alternative solutions. GPT-6 Astra 74.1%
  • SciCode In use Scientist-curated research coding problems split into subproblems across natural sciences. Code checked against test cases. Seed2.1 Pro 59.8%
  • Codeforces rating In use Model solves recent Codeforces contest problems. An Elo-style rating is computed from simulated contest performance. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 3,471