CRUXEval
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.
- 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.
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:
- Claude Fable 5.2
-
Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- and 16 more
- 1
Qwen3-Coder-Next 95.9%
- 2
Code World Model (CWM) 94.3%
- 3
Falcon-H1-34B 73.1%
- 4
DeepSeek-V3 69.8%
- 5
DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) 61.5%
- 6 Granite 4.1 30B 55.8%
- 7
Codestral 55.5%
- 8 Granite 4.0 H Small 50.3%
- 9 granite-4.0-1b 33.1%
Source: Labs’ model cards
- 1 Claude 3 Opus CoT 82%
- 2 GPT-4 Turbo Apr 2024, CoT 82%
- 3 GPT-4 Jun 2023, CoT 77.1%
- 4 GPT-3.5 Turbo Jun 2023, CoT 59%
- 5
StarCoder 2 15B 47.1%
- 6
Mixtral 8x7B 40.5%
- 7
StarCoder 2 7B 36%
- 8
Mistral 7B v0.1 34.3%
- 9
StarCoder 2 3B 34.2%
- 10
Phi-2 33.5%
- 11
Phi-1.5 27.5%
Source: Official CRUXEval leaderboard
- 95.9
Qwen3-Coder-Next
- 94.3
Code World Model (CWM)
- 82.0 Claude 3 Opus
- 82.0 GPT-4 Turbo
- 77.1 GPT-4
- 73.1
Falcon-H1-34B
- 69.8
DeepSeek-V3
- 61.5
DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024)
- 59.0 GPT-3.5 Turbo
- 55.8 Granite 4.1 30B
- 55.5
Codestral
- 50.3 Granite 4.0 H Small
- 47.1
StarCoder 2 15B
- 40.5
Mixtral 8x7B
- 36.0
StarCoder 2 7B
- 34.3
Mistral 7B v0.1
- 34.2
StarCoder 2 3B
- 33.5
Phi-2
- 33.1 granite-4.0-1b
- 27.5
Phi-1.5
- 1
Qwen3-Coder-Next 95.9%
- 2
Code World Model (CWM) 94.3%
- 3 Claude 3 Opus CoT 82%
- 4 GPT-4 Turbo Apr 2024, CoT 82%
- 5 GPT-4 Jun 2023, CoT 77.1%
- 6
Falcon-H1-34B 73.1%
- 7
DeepSeek-V3 69.8%
- 8
DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) 61.5%
- 9 GPT-3.5 Turbo Jun 2023, CoT 59%
- 10 Granite 4.1 30B 55.8%
- 11
Codestral 55.5%
- 12 Granite 4.0 H Small 50.3%
- 13
StarCoder 2 15B 47.1%
- 14
Mixtral 8x7B 40.5%
- 15
StarCoder 2 7B 36%
- 16
Mistral 7B v0.1 34.3%
- 17
StarCoder 2 3B 34.2%
- 18
Phi-2 33.5%
- 19 granite-4.0-1b 33.1%
- 20
Phi-1.5 27.5%
Sources: Labs’ model cards and official CRUXEval leaderboard
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 95.9% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | | 94.3% | Sep 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | | 73.1% | May 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 4 | | 69.8% | Dec 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 5 | | 61.5% | May 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 6 | Granite 4.1 30B | 55.8% | Apr 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 7 | | 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 |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | | 47.1% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | | 40.5% | Dec 2023 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | | 36% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | | 34.3% | Sep 2023 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | | 34.2% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | | 33.5% | Dec 2023 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | | 27.5% | Sep 2023 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 95.9% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | | 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 | | 73.1% | May 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 7 | | 69.8% | Dec 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 8 | | 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 | | 55.5% | Jan 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 12 | Granite 4.0 H Small | 50.3% | Oct 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 13 | | 47.1% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | | 40.5% | Dec 2023 | Official leaderboard | |
| 15 | | 36% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | | 34.3% | Sep 2023 | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | | 34.2% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 18 | | 33.5% | Dec 2023 | Official leaderboard | |
| 19 | granite-4.0-1b | 33.1% | Oct 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 20 | | 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.
Source: Official CRUXEval leaderboard
| Model | Effort | Harness | Score | Cost per task | Output tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude 3 Opus | CoT | 82% | |||
| GPT-4 Turbo Apr 2024 | CoT | 82% | |||
| GPT-4 Jun 2023 | CoT | 77.1% | |||
| GPT-4 Jun 2023 | 68.7% | ||||
| GPT-4 Turbo Apr 2024 | 67.7% | ||||
| Claude 3 Opus | 65.8% | ||||
| GPT-3.5 Turbo Jun 2023 | CoT | 59% | |||
| GPT-3.5 Turbo Jun 2023 | 49.4% | ||||
| | 47.1% | ||||
| | 40.5% | ||||
| | 36% | ||||
| | 34.3% | ||||
| | 34.2% | ||||
| | 33.5% | ||||
| | 27.5% |
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.
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.
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.
| Date | Launch post | Score | As 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 | 73.1 | CRUXEval | |
| Jan 28, 2025 | Best of CRUX-I / CRUX-O | ||
| Jan 13, 2025 | 55.5 | CruxEval | |
| Dec 26, 2024 | 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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 28, 2026 | | 95.9 | CRUXEval (Table 6) | Capabilities |
| Sep 30, 2025 | | 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 | | 73.1 | CRUXEval pass@1, input and output average (Table 24) | Capabilities |
| Jun 4, 2025 | | CRUXEval Input-CoT 63.3, Output-CoT 67.1, no overall score (Table 12) | Capabilities | |
| May 7, 2024 | | 61.5 | CRUXEval-I-COT 2-shot, DeepSeek-V2 Chat (RL) (Table 3) | Capabilities |
More 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