Benchmark Almanac

EngiWorld

Claude Opus 5 44.7% leads since September 2026
Not in model cards

Agents work through the full industrial engineering design loop on 1,301 expert-curated tasks that need reasoning over geometric and physical constraints across software.

59 HF paper upvotes.

Made by
Zhiman AI
Released
September 2026
Kind
CAD models
Level
Expert
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Agent task
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
Claude Opus 5 #10 on the capability index
Last model added
September 2026
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

Autonomous agents have made rapid progress in general-purpose computer use, yet reliable automation of professional industrial engineering remains out of reach. Engineering workflows require reasoning over geometric and physical constraints and keeping dependencies consistent across software and design stages. We present EngiWorld, a benchmark designed around the capabilities that real engineering projects require, from operating a single application to solving engineering problems end to end. It contains 1,301 expert-curated tasks spanning six engineering domains (CAD, CAE, CAM, BIM, EDA, and DCC) and 26 professional software applications, with both GUI and CLI interfaces. The tasks are organized into six types, corresponding to capabilities that real engineering projects require. We further introduce an artifact-centric evaluation methodology built on a unified suite of domain verifiers. The verifiers programmatically check whether final and intermediate artifacts are geometrically valid, physically feasible, and compliant with design rules. Beyond binary success, they also score how well optimized designs meet their specifications. Evaluation of seven frontier models reveals a substantial capability gap: the strongest model scores only 44.7/100, and just 3.6% of runs on tasks that require cross-software coordination succeed. EngiWorld provides a rigorous foundation for measuring progress toward agents that operate professional engineering software end to end.

Abstract of EngiWorld: What Can Frontier Agents Deliver in Professional Engineering Environments? (arXiv:2609.37686, CC0)
7
Models scored on its own leaderboard

Claude Opus 5 leads with 44.7% among models released by September 2026

Best score per model from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best.

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

  1. 1 Claude Opus 5 Overall (306 tasks) 44.7%
  2. 2 GPT-5.6 Sol Overall (306 tasks) 38.6%
  3. 3 Qwen 3.8 Max Overall (306 tasks) 26.3%
  4. 4 Gemini 3.7 Flash Overall (306 tasks) 26.1%
  5. 5 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash Overall (306 tasks) 25.9%
  6. 6 Kimi K3 Overall (306 tasks) 24.3%
  7. 7 Qwen3.8 Flash Overall (306 tasks) 16.7%

Source: Official EngiWorld leaderboard

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Claude Opus 5 44.7% Overall (306 tasks) Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
2 GPT-5.6 Sol 38.6% Overall (306 tasks) Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
3 Qwen 3.8 Max 26.3% Overall (306 tasks) Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
4 Gemini 3.7 Flash 26.1% Overall (306 tasks) Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
5 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 25.9% Overall (306 tasks) Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
6 Kimi K3 24.3% Overall (306 tasks) Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
7 Qwen3.8 Flash 16.7% Overall (306 tasks) Aug 2026 Official leaderboard

EngiScore versus API cost

Overall evaluation across 306 tasks, including unsuccessful runs. The line joins the runs that no other run beats on both measures. We redrew this chart from the numbers on the official leaderboard.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% $0$5$10$15$20 Mean API cost per task ($), lower is better EngiScore Kimi K3 (Overall (306 tasks)): EngiScore 24.3%, mean api cost per task $5.85 GPT-5.6 Sol (Overall (306 tasks)): EngiScore 38.6%, mean api cost per task $9.57 Claude Opus 5 (Overall (306 tasks)): EngiScore 44.7%, mean api cost per task $18.8 Qwen 3.8 Max (Overall (306 tasks)): EngiScore 26.3%, mean api cost per task $6.44 Gemini 3.7 Flash (Overall (306 tasks)): EngiScore 26.1%, mean api cost per task $2.08 Qwen3.8 Flash (Overall (306 tasks)): EngiScore 16.7%, mean api cost per task $0.44 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Overall (306 tasks)): EngiScore 25.9%, mean api cost per task $0.8 Claude Opus 5 (Overall (306 tasks))GPT-5.6 Sol (Overall (306 tasks))Qwen 3.8 Max (Overall (306 tasks))Gemini 3.7 Flash (Overall (306 tasks))DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Overall (306 tasks))Qwen3.8 Flash (Overall (306 tasks)) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% $0$5$10$15$20 Mean API cost per task ($), lower is better EngiScore Kimi K3 (Overall (306 tasks)): EngiScore 24.3%, mean api cost per task $5.85 GPT-5.6 Sol (Overall (306 tasks)): EngiScore 38.6%, mean api cost per task $9.57 Claude Opus 5 (Overall (306 tasks)): EngiScore 44.7%, mean api cost per task $18.8 Qwen 3.8 Max (Overall (306 tasks)): EngiScore 26.3%, mean api cost per task $6.44 Gemini 3.7 Flash (Overall (306 tasks)): EngiScore 26.1%, mean api cost per task $2.08 Qwen3.8 Flash (Overall (306 tasks)): EngiScore 16.7%, mean api cost per task $0.44 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Overall (306 tasks)): EngiScore 25.9%, mean api cost per task $0.8 Claude Opus 5 (Overall (306 tasks))GPT-5.6 Sol (Overall (306 tasks))Qwen 3.8 Max (Overall (306 tasks))Gemini 3.7 Flash (Overall (306 tasks))DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Overall (306 tasks))Qwen3.8 Flash (Overall (306 tasks))
ModelSettingEngiScoreMean API cost per task
Claude Opus 5 Overall (306 tasks) 44.7% $18.78
GPT-5.6 Sol Overall (306 tasks) 38.6% $9.57
Qwen 3.8 Max Overall (306 tasks) 26.3% $6.44
Gemini 3.7 Flash Overall (306 tasks) 26.1% $2.08
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash Overall (306 tasks) 25.9% $0.8
Kimi K3 Overall (306 tasks) 24.3% $5.85
Qwen3.8 Flash Overall (306 tasks) 16.7% $0.44

Number one over time

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.

Anthropic
Own leaderboard Not tested since Sep 2026

Source: Official EngiWorld leaderboard

Scores over time

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 Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Opus 5 GPT-5.6 Sol 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Opus 5

Source: Official EngiWorld leaderboard

No lab model card reports it yet

We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.

More in Engineering and CAD

All 23 in Engineering and CAD
  • EEBench In use 13 electrical-engineering circuit and PCB design tasks graded by deterministic build checks, simulation and BOM constraints. No LLM judge. Gemini 4 Carbon 83.9%
  • Parametric CAD Bench In use Agents author editable parametric FreeCAD part designs, graded against held-back references for geometry and spec consistency. Claude Opus 5.5 61%
  • 3DCodeBench In use Agentic procedural 3D modeling via code: author engine-ready 3D assets through software APIs. Graded for executability and shape fidelity. LongCat-2.5 55.4%
  • CADGenBench Only in system cards Agents construct CAD models from design prompts. The generation split is graded for executability and geometric correctness. Claude Fable 5 45.1%
  • PartBench Only in system cards Parametric mechanical part design and CAD-style generation, graded for geometric and manufacturing fidelity. Grok 4.6 58.5%
  • LMBuild Not in model cards Language model agents design 3D structures as parts, joints, materials and assembly steps. Scoring checks that the structures can be built and work as intended. GPT-6 Astra 66.5%