Benchmark Almanac

Pencil Puzzle Bench

Claude Fable 5 97.6% leads since Jun 2026 Not in model cards

Models solve 300 pencil puzzles of 20 varieties with unique solutions, either in one shot or agentically with step checks. Every board state can be verified against the rules.

Launch evaluated 51 models from 11 providers. A 30-puzzle subset serves costly agentic runs.

In the authors’ words

We introduce Pencil Puzzle Bench, a framework for evaluating large language model reasoning through pencil puzzles, a family of constraint-satisfaction problems closely related to NP-complete problems, with deterministic, step-level verification. From a database of 62,231 puzzles across 94 varieties with verified unique solutions, we select a benchmark of 300 puzzles spanning 20 varieties and evaluate 51 models from 11 providers in two modes: direct ask (single-shot) and agentic (multi-turn with iterative verification). A key differentiator of our benchmark is that every intermediate board state can be checked against variety-specific constraints, localizing errors to the exact rule violated, providing the infrastructure for dense, per-move reward signals for process supervision and reinforcement learning. Our evaluation reveals two distinct axes of capability: (1) reasoning effort scaling, where GPT-5.2 improves 81x from no reasoning to maximum effort; and (2) agentic iteration, where Claude Opus 4.6 rises from 0.3% to 30.0% through iterative checking, while GPT-5.2@xhigh improves from 20.2% to 56.0%. Agentic attempts span a median of 29 turns over 17 minutes, with the longest exceeding 1,221 turns and 14.3 hours - a demanding test of long-context utilization, not just reasoning.

Abstract of Pencil Puzzle Bench: A Benchmark for Multi-Step Verifiable Reasoning (arXiv:2603.02119, CC0)
Made by Approximate Labs Released Mar 2026 Puzzles and chess All tasks public Last model added Jun 2026 Scores refreshed 2 Nov 2026
Level
Expert Specialists with years of training, often over hours of work
Scored
Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
Answers
Agent task Many steps in a terminal, browser, desktop, app, game or robot.
55
Entries on its own leaderboard, 53 models we track

Claude Fable 5 leads with 97.6% among models released by Jun 2026

Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on 2 Nov 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Every run is in the next chart. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders.

The newest model with a score here came out in Jun 2026, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 Claude Fable 5 high 97.6%
  2. 2 GPT-5.5 xhigh 83.3%
  3. 3 GPT-5.4 xhigh 70.2%
  4. 4 GPT-5.2 xhigh 56%
  5. 5 Claude Opus 4.7 thinking 50%
  6. 6 Gemini 3.5 Flash high 41.9%
  7. 7 Qwen3.7-Max 40%
  8. 8 claude-opus-4-6-1m 36.7%
  9. 9 Claude Opus 4.6 thinking 33.3%
  10. 10 Gemini 3.1 Pro 33.3%
  11. 11 GPT-5.2 Pro 26.7%
  12. 12 Claude Sonnet 4.6 thinking 26.7%
  13. 13 GLM-5.2 26.7%
  14. 14 claude-sonnet-4-6-1m 23.3%
  15. 15 Kimi K2.6 20%
  16. 16 Gemini 3 Pro high 16.7%
  17. 17 Qwen3.7-Plus 16.7%
  18. 18 Kimi K2.7 Code 16.7%
  19. 19 Qwen 3.6 Plus 10%
  20. 20 MiniMax-M3 7.10%
  21. 21 GPT-5.1 medium 6.70%
  22. 22 Claude Opus 4.5 thinking 6.70%
  23. 23 Gemini 3 Flash minimal 6.70%
  24. 24 Grok 4.20 reasoning 6.70%
  25. 25 o3 3.30%
  26. 26 GPT-5 medium 3.30%
  27. 27 Claude Sonnet 4.5 3.30%
  28. 28 Grok 4.1 Fast 3.30%
  29. 29 Kimi K2.5 3.30%
  30. 30 MiniMax-M2.5 3.30%
  31. 31 Grok 4.3 xhigh 3.30%
  32. 32 GPT-3.5 Turbo Jan 2024 0%
  33. 33 o1 0%
  34. 34 GPT-4o Mar 2025 0%
  35. 35 GPT-4.1 0%
  36. 36 Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 0%
  37. 37 Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking Jul 2025 0%
  38. 38 Qwen3-Coder-480B-A35B 0%
  39. 39 grok-code-fast-1 0%
  40. 40 Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B thinking 0%
  41. 41 Kimi K2 Thinking 0%
  42. 42 DeepSeek-V3.2 0%
  43. 43 Mistral Large 3 0%
  44. 44 Devstral 2 0%
  45. 45 MiMo-V2-Flash 0%
  46. 46 GLM-4.7 0%
  47. 47 MiniMax-M2.1 0%
  48. 48 GLM-5 0%
  49. 49 Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 0%
  50. 50 Mistral Small 4 0%
  51. 51 MiMo-V2-Pro 0%
  52. 52 MiniMax-M2.7 0%
  53. 53 Gemma 4 31B IT 0%
  54. 54 DeepSeek-V4-Pro 0%
  55. 55 Nemotron 3 Ultra 0%
#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Claude Fable 5 97.6% high Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
2 GPT-5.5 83.3% xhigh Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
3 GPT-5.4 70.2% xhigh Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
4 GPT-5.2 56% xhigh Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
5 Claude Opus 4.7 50% thinking Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
6 Gemini 3.5 Flash 41.9% high May 2026 Official leaderboard
7 Qwen3.7-Max 40% May 2026 Official leaderboard
8 claude-opus-4-6-1m 36.7% Official leaderboard
9 Claude Opus 4.6 33.3% thinking Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
10 Gemini 3.1 Pro 33.3% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
11 GPT-5.2 Pro 26.7% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
12 Claude Sonnet 4.6 26.7% thinking Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
13 GLM-5.2 26.7% Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
14 claude-sonnet-4-6-1m 23.3% Official leaderboard
15 Kimi K2.6 20% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
16 Gemini 3 Pro 16.7% high Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
17 Qwen3.7-Plus 16.7% Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
18 Kimi K2.7 Code 16.7% Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
19 Qwen 3.6 Plus 10% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
20 MiniMax-M3 7.10% Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
21 GPT-5.1 6.70% medium Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
22 Claude Opus 4.5 6.70% thinking Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
23 Gemini 3 Flash 6.70% minimal Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
24 Grok 4.20 6.70% reasoning Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
25 o3 3.30% Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
26 GPT-5 3.30% medium Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
27 Claude Sonnet 4.5 3.30% Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
28 Grok 4.1 Fast 3.30% Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
29 Kimi K2.5 3.30% Jan 2026 Official leaderboard
30 MiniMax-M2.5 3.30% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
31 Grok 4.3 3.30% xhigh Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
32 GPT-3.5 Turbo Jan 2024 0% Jan 2024 Official leaderboard
33 o1 0% Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
34 GPT-4o Mar 2025 0% Mar 2025 Official leaderboard
35 GPT-4.1 0% Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
36 Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 0% Jun 2025 Official leaderboard
37 Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking Jul 2025 0% Jul 2025 Official leaderboard
38 Qwen3-Coder-480B-A35B 0% Jul 2025 Official leaderboard
39 grok-code-fast-1 0% Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
40 Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B 0% thinking Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
41 Kimi K2 Thinking 0% Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
42 DeepSeek-V3.2 0% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
43 Mistral Large 3 0% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
44 Devstral 2 0% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
45 MiMo-V2-Flash 0% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
46 GLM-4.7 0% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
47 MiniMax-M2.1 0% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
48 GLM-5 0% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
49 Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 0% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
50 Mistral Small 4 0% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
51 MiMo-V2-Pro 0% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
52 MiniMax-M2.7 0% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
53 Gemma 4 31B IT 0% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
54 DeepSeek-V4-Pro 0% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
55 Nemotron 3 Ultra 0% Jun 2026 Official leaderboard

The best score, 97.6%, costs $20 a task

Runs on the cost frontier score higher than any run that's cheaper. The costs are the leaderboard's own estimates, so compare them only within this benchmark.

Google DeepMind OpenAI Anthropic Cost frontier One model at each effort level
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% $0.01 $0.10 $1.00 $10 $100 $1,000 Cost per task, log scale Claude Fable 5, high GPT-5.5, xhigh GPT-5.2, medium Gemini 3 Pro GPT-5.2, low Gemma 4 31B IT 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% $0.01 $0.10 $1.00 $10 $100 $1,000 Cost per task, log scale Claude Fable 5, high GPT-5.5, xhigh
ModelEffortHarnessScoreCost per taskOutput tokens
Claude Fable 5 high 97.6% $20
GPT-5.5 xhigh 83.3% $3.07
GPT-5.4 xhigh 70.2% $8.08
GPT-5.2 xhigh 56% $9.74
Claude Opus 4.7 thinking 50% $9.64
Gemini 3.5 Flash high 41.9% $25
Qwen3.7-Max 40% $8.86
GPT-5.2 high 36.7% $7.30
Claude Opus 4.6 thinking 33.3% $6.24
Gemini 3.1 Pro 33.3% $3.67
Claude Opus 4.6 30% $11
GPT-5.2 Pro 26.7% $42
Claude Sonnet 4.6 thinking 26.7% $3.94
GLM-5.2 26.7% $21
GPT-5.2 medium 23.3% $2.81
Claude Opus 4.6 max 23.3% $11
Kimi K2.6 20% $6.21
Gemini 3 Pro high 16.7% $3.06
Claude Sonnet 4.6 16.7% $8.91
Qwen3.7-Plus 16.7% $10
Kimi K2.7 Code 16.7% $3.92
Gemini 3 Pro 13.3% $2.48
Gemini 3 Pro minimal 10% $3.35
GPT-5.2 low 10% $0.60
Qwen 3.6 Plus 10%
MiniMax-M3 7.10% $11
GPT-5.1 medium 6.70% $0.81
Claude Opus 4.5 thinking 6.70% $4.71
Gemini 3 Flash minimal 6.70% $0.42
Gemini 3 Flash high 6.70% $0.40
Grok 4.20 reasoning 6.70% $1.19
o3 3.30% $2.45
GPT-5 medium 3.30% $11
Claude Sonnet 4.5 3.30% $12
Grok 4.1 Fast 3.30% $0.44
Claude Opus 4.5 high 3.30% $8.82
Kimi K2.5 3.30% $1.72
MiniMax-M2.5 3.30% $1.95
Grok 4.3 xhigh 3.30% $59
GPT-3.5 Turbo Jan 2024 0%
o1 0% $4.03
GPT-4o Mar 2025 0% $56
GPT-4.1 0% $221
Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 0% $1.17
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking Jul 2025 0% $0.71
Qwen3-Coder-480B-A35B 0% $0.68
grok-code-fast-1 0% $1.02
Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B thinking 0% $2.62
Claude Sonnet 4.5 thinking 0% $7.50
Kimi K2 Thinking 0% $1.00
Grok 4.1 Fast reasoning 0% $0.49
DeepSeek-V3.2 0% $1.58
Mistral Large 3 0% $39
Devstral 2 0% $0.11
GPT-5.2 0% $0.61
MiMo-V2-Flash 0% $0.76
GLM-4.7 0% $1.73
MiniMax-M2.1 0% $1.67
GLM-5 0% $8.46
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 0% $7.30
Mistral Small 4 0% $10
MiMo-V2-Pro 0% $9.30
MiniMax-M2.7 0% $3.71
Gemma 4 31B IT 0% $0.01
DeepSeek-V4-Pro 0% $3.59
Grok 4.3 0% $13
Gemini 3.5 Flash low 0% $74
Nemotron 3 Ultra 0% $8.73

4 models have held number one since its release in Mar 2026

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

OpenAI Anthropic
Own leaderboard Passed 85% in Jun 2026, by Claude Fable 5

The best score passed 85% in Jun 2026

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

On the benchmark’s own leaderboard Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Fable 5 GPT-5.5 GPT-5.4 GPT-5.2 Gemini 3 Pro GPT-5.1 o3 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Fable 5 GPT-5.5

No lab model card reports it yet

We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.

More in Games and long tasks

All 68 in Games and long tasks
  • ARC-AGI-3 In use Interactive game environments where agents must explore, infer goals and rules, and act efficiently without instructions. GPT-6 Astra 100%
  • MineDojo Fading Agents complete open-ended tasks in Minecraft, such as mining blocks and fighting mobs, from a large simulation suite. Programmatic checks score many tasks. Seed2.0 Pro 49%
  • Orak Fading LLM agents play 12 popular video games across most genres through an MCP interface. Scores come from in-game progress or outcomes per title. Nemotron 3 Nano 4B 22.9
  • GameWorld Only in system cards Multimodal game agents play 34 browser games across 170 tasks. Outcomes are checked from the game state. Gemini 3 Flash 41.9%
  • Swarm Bench Only in system cards Models orchestrate agent swarms on complex tasks that benefit from coordinated decomposition and parallel execution. Kimi K3 76.3%
  • TextQuests Only in system cards Agents play 25 classic interactive fiction games. Measures game progress and harmful actions per 100 steps. Muse Spark 2.40