Coding benchmark # CursorBench leaderboard > CursorBench results for 14 AI models, led by Claude Opus 5.5 at 57.8%. What the benchmark measures, who runs it, and a source for every score. - Canonical page: https://noometry.com/benchmarks/cursorbench - Last updated: 2026-10-10 - Title: CursorBench Leaderboard (October 2026): Scores by Model As of October 2026, Claude Opus 5.5 has the highest published CursorBench score on Noometry at 57.8%, out of 14 models with results. Last verified October 10, 2026 ## About CursorBench Coding-agent tasks drawn from real Cursor sessions, published by Cursor. - **Category:** [Coding](https://noometry.com/best/coding) - **Introduced:** 2026 - **Unit:** Percent (random guessing ≈ 0%) - **Official site:** [cursor.com](https://cursor.com) ## Top 14 models Top models on CursorBench 1. Claude Opus 5.5 57.8% 2. Claude Sonnet 5.5 55.5% 3. Claude Fable 5.1 51.8% 4. Claude Opus 5 46.6% 5. Grok 4.7 46.3% 6. GLM-5.3 42.6% 7. GPT-5.6 Sol 41.7% 8. Muse Spark 1.3 41.6% 9. Grok 4.6 41.4% 10. GPT-5.6 Terra 41.3% 11. Gemini 3.8 Flash 39.6% 12. GLM-5.3-Flash 36.8% 13. GPT-5.6 Luna 35.9% 14. Claude Sonnet 5 34.1% 15. 2030405060 Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. [Advertise on Noometry](https://noometry.com/advertise) ## All results CursorBench results by model | # | Model | Provider | Score | Setting | Source | Date | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 1 | [Claude Opus 5.5](https://noometry.com/models/claude-opus-5-5) | [Anthropic](https://noometry.com/providers/anthropic) | 57.8% | max | [Epoch AI](https://epoch.ai/benchmarks) | | | 2 | [Claude Sonnet 5.5](https://noometry.com/models/claude-sonnet-5-5) | [Anthropic](https://noometry.com/providers/anthropic) | 55.5% | max | [Epoch AI](https://epoch.ai/benchmarks) | | | 3 | [Claude Fable 5.1](https://noometry.com/models/claude-fable-5-1) | [Anthropic](https://noometry.com/providers/anthropic) | 51.8% | max | [Epoch AI](https://epoch.ai/benchmarks) | | | 4 | [Claude Opus 5](https://noometry.com/models/claude-opus-5) | [Anthropic](https://noometry.com/providers/anthropic) | 46.6% | max | [Epoch AI](https://epoch.ai/benchmarks) | | | 5 | [Grok 4.7](https://noometry.com/models/grok-4-7) | [xAI](https://noometry.com/providers/xai) | 46.3% | xhigh | [Epoch AI](https://epoch.ai/benchmarks) | | | 6 | [GLM-5.3](https://noometry.com/models/glm-5-3) | [Z.ai (Zhipu)](https://noometry.com/providers/zai) | 42.6% | max | [Epoch AI](https://epoch.ai/benchmarks) | | | 7 | [GPT-5.6 Sol](https://noometry.com/models/gpt-5-6-sol) | [OpenAI](https://noometry.com/providers/openai) | 41.7% | max | [Epoch AI](https://epoch.ai/benchmarks) | | | 8 | [Muse Spark 1.3](https://noometry.com/models/muse-spark-1-3) | [![](/logos/meta.svg) Meta](https://noometry.com/providers/meta) | 41.6% | max | [Epoch AI](https://epoch.ai/benchmarks) | | | 9 | [Grok 4.6](https://noometry.com/models/grok-4-6) | [xAI](https://noometry.com/providers/xai) | 41.4% | xhigh | [Epoch AI](https://epoch.ai/benchmarks) | | | 10 | [GPT-5.6 Terra](https://noometry.com/models/gpt-5-6-terra) | [OpenAI](https://noometry.com/providers/openai) | 41.3% | max | [Epoch AI](https://epoch.ai/benchmarks) | | | 11 | [Gemini 3.8 Flash](https://noometry.com/models/gemini-3-8-flash) | [![](/logos/google.svg) Google](https://noometry.com/providers/google) | 39.6% | high | [Epoch AI](https://epoch.ai/benchmarks) | | | 12 | [GLM-5.3-Flash](https://noometry.com/models/glm-5-3-flash) | [Z.ai (Zhipu)](https://noometry.com/providers/zai) | 36.8% | max | [Epoch AI](https://epoch.ai/benchmarks) | | | 13 | [GPT-5.6 Luna](https://noometry.com/models/gpt-5-6-luna) | [OpenAI](https://noometry.com/providers/openai) | 35.9% | max | [Epoch AI](https://epoch.ai/benchmarks) | | | 14 | [Claude Sonnet 5](https://noometry.com/models/claude-sonnet-5) | [Anthropic](https://noometry.com/providers/anthropic) | 34.1% | max | [Epoch AI](https://epoch.ai/benchmarks) | | ## Compare the leaders - [Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5](https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-5-5-vs-claude-sonnet-5-5) - [Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Fable 5.1](https://noometry.com/compare/claude-fable-5-1-vs-claude-opus-5-5) - [Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Opus 5](https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-5-vs-claude-opus-5-5) - [Claude Opus 5.5 vs Grok 4.7](https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-5-5-vs-grok-4-7) - [Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Claude Fable 5.1](https://noometry.com/compare/claude-fable-5-1-vs-claude-sonnet-5-5) - [Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Claude Opus 5](https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-5-vs-claude-sonnet-5-5) ## Other coding benchmarks - [SWE-bench Verified](https://noometry.com/benchmarks/swe-bench-verified) - [DeepSWE](https://noometry.com/benchmarks/deepswe) - [FrontierCode](https://noometry.com/benchmarks/frontiercode) - [SWE-bench Verified (bash only)](https://noometry.com/benchmarks/swe-bench-bash-only) - [Aider Polyglot](https://noometry.com/benchmarks/aider-polyglot) - [LMArena WebDev](https://noometry.com/benchmarks/arena-webdev) - [SWE-bench Multilingual](https://noometry.com/benchmarks/swe-bench-multilingual) - [FrontierSWE](https://noometry.com/benchmarks/frontierswe) - [SciCode](https://noometry.com/benchmarks/scicode) - [GSO](https://noometry.com/benchmarks/gso-bench) - [WeirdML](https://noometry.com/benchmarks/weirdml) - [LMArena Coding](https://noometry.com/benchmarks/arena-coding) ## Frequently asked questions ### What does CursorBench measure? Coding-agent tasks drawn from real Cursor sessions, published by Cursor. ### Which model has the highest CursorBench score? As of October 2026, Claude Opus 5.5 has the highest published CursorBench score on Noometry at 57.8%, out of 14 models with results. ### What is the best open-weight model on CursorBench? GLM-5.3 has the highest CursorBench accuracy among open-weight models at 42.6%, ranking 6 of 14 overall. ### Cite this page Noometry. (2026). CursorBench leaderboard. Retrieved October 10, 2026, from https://noometry.com/benchmarks/cursorbench Quote Noometry with a link back to this page. It is also available in [Markdown](https://noometry.com/md/benchmarks/cursorbench.md).