Loading page…
Preferred languages
More languages supported by Google Translate
Open the selector to load the current language catalog.
Translations are provided by Google Translate.
Loading page…
Preferred languages
More languages supported by Google Translate
Open the selector to load the current language catalog.
Translations are provided by Google Translate.
Coding benchmark
Every model the catalog carries a published PostTrainBench v1.1 value for, ranked by that value.
Post-training four base language models across seven weighted benchmarks, with ten hours and one H100 per run.
15 models with a published PostTrainBench v1.1 value, ordered by that value, highest first. Models the source has not scored on this benchmark are not listed — they are unmeasured, not last.
| Rank | Model | Provider | Weighted aggregate across four base models and seven benchmarks |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Anthropic | 49.3 | |
| 2 | 45.3 | ||
| 3 | OpenAI | 44.3 |
What the benchmark measures and how its value is published, from the source’s own record.
PostTrainBench v1.1 is a coding benchmark published by PostTrainBench v1.1 leaderboard and methodology. Post-training four base language models across seven weighted benchmarks, with ten hours and one H100 per run. Its evaluation set is described by the source as post-training Qwen3 1.7B and 4B, SmolLM3 3B, and Gemma3 4B. The source rates its difficulty as frontier agent evaluation.
Each model's result is published by PostTrainBench v1.1 leaderboard and methodology as weighted aggregate across four base models and seven benchmarks. ModelScale prints that value to 1 decimal place, exactly as published, and never converts or rescales it. This page ranks the 15 models that carry a published value, highest value first; a model the source never scored is left out rather than ranked at zero. The source does not state whether a higher value is the better result, so neither does this page.
| 4 | Anthropic | 40.2 |
| 5 | MiniMax | 39.3 |
| 6 | OpenAI | 36.2 |
| 7 | Anthropic | 35.0 |
| 8 | Anthropic | 32.9 |
| 9 | Moonshot AI | 32.0 |
| 10 | Z.AI | 31.7 |
| 11 | Anthropic | 28.6 |
| 12 | OpenAI | 27.2 |
| 13 | xAI | 23.4 |
| 14 | 22.0 |
| 15 | OpenAI | 19.0 |
Evidence key: Observed
Rows are ordered by the value PostTrainBench v1.1 leaderboard and methodology published, highest first. The source does not state whether a higher value is the better result, so this page does not either: for a benchmark that measures a rate of failure, read the table from the bottom.