Benchmark Almanac

KernelBench

In use

Replace PyTorch operators with faster custom GPU kernels. Scored on correctness and speedup.

KernelBench v0.1 (July 2025) fixed problem sizes and numerics, added randomized tests and a Level 4 of Hugging Face models. The HF dataset tracks v0.1. xAI reports an internal derivative, KernelBenchInternal v1.1.

Released
December 2024
Kind
GPU kernels
Level
Expert
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Code
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
MiniMax-M3 #79 on the capability index
Last in a launch post
June 2026
Last model added
June 2026

In the authors’ words

Efficient GPU kernels are crucial for building performant machine learning architectures, but writing them is a time-consuming challenge that requires significant expertise; therefore, we explore using language models (LMs) to automate kernel generation. We introduce KernelBench, an open-source framework for evaluating LMs' ability to write fast and correct kernels on a suite of 250 carefully selected PyTorch ML workloads. KernelBench represents a real-world engineering environment and making progress on the introduced benchmark directly translates to faster practical kernels. We introduce a new evaluation metric fast_p, which measures the percentage of generated kernels that are functionally correct and offer a speedup greater than an adjustable threshold p over baseline. Our experiments across various state-of-the-art models and test-time methods show that frontier reasoning models perform the best out of the box but still fall short overall, matching the PyTorch baseline in less than 20% of the cases. While we show that results can improve by leveraging execution and profiling feedback during iterative refinement, KernelBench remains a challenging benchmark, with its difficulty increasing as we raise speedup threshold p.

Abstract of KernelBench: Can LLMs Write Efficient GPU Kernels? (arXiv:2502.10517, CC0)
1
Model scored in lab cards
1
Launch post lists it, from 1 lab

MiniMax-M3 leads with 28.8%

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.

  1. 1 MiniMax-M3 28.8%

Source: Labs’ model cards

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 MiniMax-M3 28.8% Jun 2026 Lab model card

Scores over time

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

Reported by the lab in its model card
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) MiniMax-M3 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) MiniMax-M3

Source: Labs’ model cards

One lab put it in a launch post in the last six months

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.

MiniMax
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
Jun 1, 2026 MiniMax-M3 28.8 KernelBench Hard

More in AI research

All 104 in AI research
  • PaperBench In use Agent replicates ICML 2024 papers from scratch. LLM judge grades against author-written hierarchical rubrics. Qwen 3.8 Max 93%
  • MLS-Bench In use Agent must invent one algorithmic change in an ML research scaffold whose gain transfers across settings. Scored relative to human baselines. Claude Fable 5.1 50.3%
  • PostTrainBench 1.2 In use CLI agent gets a base model, one H100 and a time budget to post-train it for a target benchmark. Scored on normalized gain. Claude Fable 5.1 44.6%
  • MLE-bench In use Kaggle-style ML engineering competitions. Agent trains models and is scored against competition leaderboards. GPT-6 Astra 93.8%
  • PMPP-Hard In use Agents write GPU kernels for 69 tasks that must be correct, and on 48 of them also run within 1.25 times the reference time. The score is the area under the solved-tasks curve over a 10-hour budget, out of 690 task-hours. Inkling 2 Small 494.3
  • OpenAI PRs Only in system cards Agents replicate internal OpenAI pull requests from a pre-PR branch and a prompt. Graded by hidden unit tests as pass@1. GPT-5.2 55%