Benchmark Almanac

CursorBench 3.2

Claude Fable 5.1 73.4% leads since Sep 2026 In use

Agents do ambiguous multi-file coding tasks from real Cursor sessions in Cursor's harness. Version 3.2 added instruction following and advanced tool use problems. Agentic graders score correctness.

Cursor's changelog dates it 2026-07-08. It changed the task mix, so scores do not compare with 3.1. xAI's Grok 4.6 card and Anthropic's Fable 5.1 card name this version.

Made by Cursor Released Jul 2026 Fixing real repositories Tasks kept private Last in a launch post Sep 2026 Last model added Sep 2026
Level
Expert Specialists with years of training, often over hours of work
Scored
Graded by a model A language model scores each response, usually against a rubric.
Answers
Code A program or patch run against tests.
2
Models scored in lab cards
2
Launch posts list it, from 2 labs
2
System cards report it, from 2 labs

Claude Fable 5.1 leads with 73.4%

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 Claude Fable 5.1 73.4%
  2. 2 Grok 4.6 70.8%
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Claude Fable 5.1 73.4% Sep 2026 Model card
2 Grok 4.6 70.8% Aug 2026 Model card

2 models have held number one since its release in Jul 2026

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.

xAI Anthropic
Lab claims Replaced by 4.0, Sep 2026

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 Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Fable 5.1 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Fable 5.1

2 labs 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.

xAI
Anthropic
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
1 Sep 2026 Claude Fable 5.1 73.4 Agentic coding CursorBench 3.2.0
12 Aug 2026 Grok 4.6 69.9 CursorBench v3.2

2 system cards report it, from 2 labs

Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
1 Sep 2026 Claude Fable 5.1 system card 73.4 CursorBench 3.2.0 at max effort, measured by Cursor; 68.0% at medium effort (8.8) Capabilities
12 Aug 2026 Grok 4.6 model card 70.8 CursorBench 3.2, xhigh, Cursor agent harness, run by Cursor (2.1 text). High = 69.9% Capabilities

Versions

We switch the top row to each new version when it comes out. Open it for one row per version. An old version stays in play while people still test it, so whoever first takes it past 85% gets credit for closing it out.

Cursor xAI Anthropic
CursorBench 4.0 5 leaders
CursorBench 1 leader
Composer 2 61.3%
CursorBench 3.2 Replaced by 4.0, Sep 2026

More in Coding

All 243 in Coding
  • SWE-bench Verified In use 500 human-validated GitHub issues from 12 Python repos. Agent writes a patch that must pass hidden tests. Claude Opus 4.7 83.5%
  • SWE-bench Multilingual In use 300 GitHub-issue tasks across nine programming languages in SWE-bench format. Patch graded by repository tests. Claude Opus 5.5 93.9%
  • LiveCodeBench v6 In use Competitive programming problems collected after model cutoffs from LeetCode, AtCoder, Codeforces. Scored pass@1 on hidden tests. DeepSeek-V4-Pro 93.5%
  • DeepSWE In use 113 original long-horizon engineering tasks across 91 repos and five languages, written from scratch. Hand-written verifiers accept alternative solutions. GPT-6 Astra 74.1%
  • SciCode In use Scientist-curated research coding problems split into subproblems across natural sciences. Code checked against test cases. Seed2.1 Pro 59.8%
  • Codeforces rating In use Model solves recent Codeforces contest problems. An Elo-style rating is computed from simulated contest performance. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 3,471