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

reasoning benchmark

Terminal-Bench 2.1 Leaderboard

Terminal-Bench 2.1 is an updated release of the Terminal-Bench benchmark that tests AI agents' ability to operate a computer via the terminal. It evaluates how well models handle real-world, end-to-end tasks autonomously, including compiling code, training models, setting up servers, system administration, data science workflows, and security tasks.

Updated Aug 17, 2026

Models28
Model coverage28
MetricScore
EvidenceB

On this page

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

Terminal-Bench 2.1 Ranking

Higher score ranks better on this benchmark.

28 rows
Columns

Show columns

Sort by
Rank
Model
Score
Percentile
Participants
Evidence
Evaluated
Rank01ModelOPGPT-5.6 SolOpenAIScore88.8%Percentile100.0%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank02ModelMAKimi K3Moonshot AIScore88.3%Percentile96.3%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank03ModelZAGLM-5.3Zhipu AIScore88.2%Percentile92.6%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank04ModelDEDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813DeepSeekScore87.9%Percentile88.9%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank05ModelOPGPT-5.6 TerraOpenAIScore87.4%Percentile85.2%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank06ModelACQwen3.8 MaxAlibaba Cloud / Qwen TeamScore86.6%Percentile81.5%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank07ModelGOGemini 3.7 FlashGoogleScore85.8%Percentile77.8%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank08ModelOPGPT-5.6 LunaOpenAIScore84.7%Percentile74.1%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank09ModelANClaude Fable 5AnthropicScore84.3%Percentile70.4%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank10ModelXAGrok 4.5xAIScore83.3%Percentile66.7%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank11ModelMEMuse Spark 1.2MetaScore82.9%Percentile63.0%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank12ModelDEDeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731DeepSeekScore82.7%Percentile59.3%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank13ModelZAGLM-5.2Zhipu AIScore82.7%Percentile55.6%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank14ModelMEMuse Spark 1.1MetaScore80.0%Percentile51.9%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank15ModelGOGemini 3.6 FlashGoogleScore78.0%Percentile48.1%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank16ModelACQwen3.8-27BAlibaba Cloud / Qwen TeamScore73.0%Percentile44.4%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank17ModelTEHy3TencentScore71.7%Percentile40.7%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank18ModelBYSeed 2.1 ProByteDanceScore71.0%Percentile37.0%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank19ModelPOLaguna S 2.1PoolsideScore70.2%Percentile33.3%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank20ModelBYSeed 2.1 TurboByteDanceScore67.6%Percentile29.6%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank21ModelMIMiniMax M3MiniMaxScore66.0%Percentile25.9%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank22ModelTMInkling-SmallThinking Machines LabScore64.7%Percentile22.2%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank23ModelMIMAI-Code-1.1-FlashMicrosoftScore62.9%Percentile18.5%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank24ModelUPSolar Pro 4UpstageScore57.0%Percentile14.8%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank25ModelNVNemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)NVIDIAScore56.4%Percentile11.1%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank26ModelGOGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogleScore54.0%Percentile7.4%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank27ModelMEMuse Glimmer-30BMetaScore51.7%Percentile3.7%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026
Rank28ModelNVNemotron 3.5 Lightning (30B A3B)NVIDIAScore24.6%Percentile0.0%Participants28EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026

Terminal-Bench 2.1 Highlights

The leading models and scores on this benchmark.

Rank #1GPT-5.6 Sol88.8%Rank #2Kimi K388.3%Rank #3GLM-5.388.2%Rank #4DeepSeek-V4-Pro-081387.9%

Terminal-Bench 2.1 Score Distribution

A closer view of the leading scores on this benchmark.

Terminal-Bench 2.1

The Top AI Models for Terminal-Bench 2.1

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

Ranking basisThis terminal-bench 2.1 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
    OP
    GPT-5.6 SolOpenAI
    Score
    88.8%
    Price
    $5.0 input / $30 output per 1M tokens
    Speed
    Up to 27 tok/s via OpenAI

    Strengths

    • Ranks #1 of 28 compared models
    • 100th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures Terminal-Bench 2.1, not total model capability
  2. 02
    MA
    Kimi K3Moonshot AI
    Score
    88.3%
    Price
    $3.0 input / $15 output per 1M tokens
    Speed
    Up to 26 tok/s via Fireworks

    Strengths

    • Ranks #2 of 28 compared models
    • 96th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures Terminal-Bench 2.1, not total model capability
  3. 03
    ZA
    GLM-5.3Zhipu AI
    Score
    88.2%

    Strengths

    • Ranks #3 of 28 compared models
    • 93th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures Terminal-Bench 2.1, not total model capability
  4. 04
    DE
    DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813DeepSeek
    Score
    87.9%
    Price
    $0.43 input / $0.87 output per 1M tokens
    Speed
    Up to 33 tok/s via DeepSeek

    Strengths

    • Ranks #4 of 28 compared models
    • 89th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures Terminal-Bench 2.1, not total model capability
  5. 05
    OP
    GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI
    Score
    87.4%
    Price
    $2.0 input / $12 output per 1M tokens
    Speed
    Up to 35 tok/s via OpenAI

    Strengths

    • Ranks #5 of 28 compared models
    • 85th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures Terminal-Bench 2.1, not total model capability

Selection summary

Best AI Models for Terminal-Bench 2.1

GPT-5.6 Sol currently leads Terminal-Bench 2.1 with 88.8%. 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 #1GPT-5.6 Sol88.8% · $5.0 input / $30 output per 1M tokensBenchmark rank #2Kimi K388.3% · $3.0 input / $15 output per 1M tokensBenchmark rank #3GLM-5.388.2%

What is Terminal-Bench 2.1?

What Terminal-Bench 2.1 measures and how its scores work.

Terminal-Bench 2.1 is an updated release of the Terminal-Bench benchmark that tests AI agents' ability to operate a computer via the terminal. It evaluates how well models handle real-world, end-to-end tasks autonomously, including compiling code, training models, setting up servers, system administration, data science workflows, and security tasks.

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

Family
Terminal-Bench 2.1
Modality
text
Primary category
reasoning
Score direction
higher
LLMBoard eligible
Yes
Evaluation key
terminal-bench-2.1|llm-stats-current

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

FAQ

Common questions about Terminal-Bench 2.1.

Which model scores highest on Terminal-Bench 2.1?

GPT-5.6 Sol is currently ranked first with 88.8%.

What does Terminal-Bench 2.1 measure?

Terminal-Bench 2.1 is an updated release of the Terminal-Bench benchmark that tests AI agents' ability to operate a computer via the terminal. It evaluates how well models handle real-world, end-to-end tasks autonomously, including compiling code, training models, setting up servers, system administration, data science workflows, and security tasks.

Is a higher score better?

Yes. Higher values rank better for this benchmark.

How many models are compared?

28 model results are currently shown.

Does this benchmark affect the overall score?

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