llmboard.aiAI model intelligence
Home

Model Rankings

OverallOpen ModelsAgentCodingReasoningMathKnowledgeInstruction FollowingTextVision
Image GenerationImage Editing
Video GenerationImage to VideoVideo Editing
Text to SpeechSpeech to Text
Embeddings

Efficiency

Chat Token PricingImage PricingVideo PricingAudio Pricing
Chat Speed & LatencyProvider Reliability

Benchmarks

GPQAMMLU-ProAIME 2025SWE-Bench VerifiedMMLUHumanity's Last ExamLiveCodeBenchMATHHumanEvalMMMU-Pro
All Benchmarks

Tools

Model DirectoryCompare Models

Scoring & Data

Scoring & Data
393 models668 benchmarks

Leaderboard Center

Overall RankingCodingCore BenchmarksPrice & ValueRuntime Performance

Modalities

All ModelsImage GenerationImage EditingVideo GenerationImage-to-VideoVideo EditingText-to-SpeechSpeech-to-TextEmbeddings

Data & Methods

Scoring MethodAll BenchmarksReasoningMath

Vendors

All VendorsOpenAIAnthropicGoogle
llmboard.aiCopyright 2026 llmboard.ai

agents benchmark

Program Bench Leaderboard

Program Bench evaluates code-generation agents by asking them to recreate a program's behavior from only a compiled binary and documentation. It spans 200 tasks from small CLI tools to large systems such as FFmpeg and SQLite, with submissions judged against more than 248,000 fuzz-generated behavioral tests.

Updated Aug 17, 2026

Models6
Model coverage6
MetricScore
EvidenceB

On this page

  • Ranking
  • Highlights
  • Distribution
  • Top models
  • About
  • FAQ

Program Bench Ranking

Higher score ranks better on this benchmark.

6 rows
Columns

Show columns

Sort by
Rank
Model
Score
Percentile
Participants
Evidence
Evaluated
Rank01ModelMAKimi K3Moonshot AIScore77.8%Percentile100.0%Participants6EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank02ModelZAGLM-5.2Zhipu AIScore63.7%Percentile80.0%Participants6EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank03ModelMAKimi K2.7 CodeMoonshot AIScore53.6%Percentile60.0%Participants6EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank04ModelBYSeed 2.1 ProByteDanceScore50.3%Percentile40.0%Participants6EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank05ModelBYSeed 2.1 TurboByteDanceScore49.4%Percentile20.0%Participants6EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank06ModelZAGLM-5.3Zhipu AIScore19.0%Percentile0.0%Participants6EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026

Program Bench Highlights

The leading models and scores on this benchmark.

Rank #1Kimi K377.8%Rank #2GLM-5.263.7%Rank #3Kimi K2.7 Code53.6%Rank #4Seed 2.1 Pro50.3%

Program Bench Score Distribution

A closer view of the leading scores on this benchmark.

Program Bench

The Top AI Models for Program Bench

The first five results on this benchmark, with official price and output speed added where the model identity can be matched.

Ranking basisThis program bench AI model leaderboard uses descending score in the benchmark's original unit. The leaderboard ranking keeps matched price and speed data separate from benchmark evidence.

  1. 01
    MA
    Kimi K3Moonshot AI
    Score
    77.8%
    Price
    $3.0 input / $15 output per 1M tokens
    Speed
    Up to 26 tok/s via Fireworks

    Strengths

    • Ranks #1 of 6 compared models
    • 100th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures Program Bench, not total model capability
  2. 02
    ZA
    GLM-5.2Zhipu AI
    Score
    63.7%
    Price
    $1.4 input / $4.4 output per 1M tokens

    Strengths

    • Ranks #2 of 6 compared models
    • 80th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures Program Bench, not total model capability
  3. 03
    MA
    Kimi K2.7 CodeMoonshot AI
    Score
    53.6%
    Price
    $0.95 input / $4.0 output per 1M tokens
    Speed
    Up to 36 tok/s via Novita

    Strengths

    • Ranks #3 of 6 compared models
    • 60th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures Program Bench, not total model capability
  4. 04
    BY
    Seed 2.1 ProByteDance
    Score
    50.3%

    Strengths

    • Ranks #4 of 6 compared models
    • 40th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures Program Bench, not total model capability
  5. 05
    BY
    Seed 2.1 TurboByteDance
    Score
    49.4%

    Strengths

    • Ranks #5 of 6 compared models
    • 20th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures Program Bench, not total model capability

Selection summary

Best AI Models for Program Bench

Kimi K3 currently leads Program Bench with 77.8%. It is the top model on this specific benchmark, while the best LLM for the broader task should also be checked against other benchmarks, price and runtime.

Use this leaderboard with the supporting benchmark results and coverage details above. A leaderboard position summarizes the selected ranking signal; it does not replace workload-specific testing.

Benchmark rank #1Kimi K377.8% · $3.0 input / $15 output per 1M tokensBenchmark rank #2GLM-5.263.7% · $1.4 input / $4.4 output per 1M tokensBenchmark rank #3Kimi K2.7 Code53.6% · $0.95 input / $4.0 output per 1M tokens

What is Program Bench?

What Program Bench measures and how its scores work.

Program Bench evaluates code-generation agents by asking them to recreate a program's behavior from only a compiled binary and documentation. It spans 200 tasks from small CLI tools to large systems such as FFmpeg and SQLite, with submissions judged against more than 248,000 fuzz-generated behavioral tests.

Scores are shown in ratio. This benchmark is not independently verified and has an evidence level of B.

Family
Program Bench
Modality
text
Primary category
agents
Score direction
higher
LLMBoard eligible
Yes
Evaluation key
program-bench|llm-stats-current

Benchmark scores retain their original unit. Overall score eligibility is shown separately.

FAQ

Common questions about Program Bench.

Which model scores highest on Program Bench?

Kimi K3 is currently ranked first with 77.8%.

What does Program Bench measure?

Program Bench evaluates code-generation agents by asking them to recreate a program's behavior from only a compiled binary and documentation. It spans 200 tasks from small CLI tools to large systems such as FFmpeg and SQLite, with submissions judged against more than 248,000 fuzz-generated behavioral tests.

Is a higher score better?

Yes. Higher values rank better for this benchmark.

How many models are compared?

6 model results are currently shown.

Does this benchmark affect the overall score?

Yes. This benchmark can contribute to the current LLMBoard capability score.