CursorBench 3.1

# Cursor · CursorBench Source: [https://cursor.com/evals](https://cursor.com/evals) We evaluate agents on ambiguous, multi\-file tasks from real Cursor sessions\. Higher scores are better\. [More about CursorBench](https://cursor.com/blog/cursorbench)A scatter and line chart comparing Fable 5, Opus 4\.8, Opus 4\.7, GPT\-5\.5, Sonnet 5, Sonnet 4\.6, GLM 5\.2, Composer 2\.5, and Composer 2 scores against average cost per task\.75% CursorBench 3\.1 score70%65%60%55%50%45%$20$16$12$8$4$0Average cost per taskFable 5 highComposer 2\.5GPT\-5\.5 mediumGemini 3\.5 FlashOpus 4\.8 highSonnet 5 highKimi K2\.7 CodeGLM 5\.2 highModel1Fable 5 Max72\.9%$18\.0263,842762Fable 5 Extra High72\.0%$13\.7448,754633Fable 5 High70\.6%$10\.8137,173544Fable 5 Medium69\.8%$8\.2728,507475Opus 4\.7 Max64\.8%$11\.0262,989966GPT\-5\.5 Extra High64\.3%$4\.3717,905467Fable 5 Low64\.2%$5\.7018,882368Opus 4\.8 Max63\.8%$7\.5977,370609Composer 2\.563\.2%$0\.5515,1523710GPT\-5\.5 High62\.6%$3\.5913,3294011Opus 4\.8 Extra High62\.1%$6\.1455,6225412Opus 4\.7 Extra High61\.6%$7\.1143,9427213Sonnet 5 Max61\.2%$6\.8793,4859314Opus 4\.7 High59\.4%$5\.0132,2275915GPT\-5\.5 Medium59\.2%$2\.229,0653516Opus 4\.8 High58\.4%$4\.4136,7884517Sonnet 5 Extra High58\.4%$5\.2358,2288618Sonnet 5 High57\.0%$3\.7441,7356619Opus 4\.8 Medium56\.6%$3\.8331,6844120Sonnet 5 Medium54\.9%$2\.5727,4695321GLM 5\.2 Max54\.6%$3\.1151,3128322Opus 4\.8 Low54\.3%$2\.9322,7263623Opus 4\.7 Medium52\.7%$2\.9319,1934124Kimi K2\.7 Code52\.7%$1\.9232,9027025Composer 252\.2%$0\.5614,1634026GLM 5\.2 High50\.7%$2\.4630,6217627Gemini 3\.5 Flash49\.8%$1\.9435,1057928Sonnet 4\.6 Max49\.0%$3\.0940,2805529GPT\-5\.5 Low48\.8%$1\.194,9232430Sonnet 4\.6 High48\.8%$3\.0637,3525731Opus 4\.7 Low48\.3%$1\.8713,1642932Sonnet 5 Low47\.7%$1\.4617,0283733Kimi 2\.647\.6%$1\.2724,7835634Sonnet 4\.6 Medium46\.0%$2\.6431,3605035Sonnet 4\.6 Low41\.5%$1\.8921,2115036Kimi 2\.531\.9%$0\.879,44630 ## Changelog ### CursorBench 3\.1 - Introduced problems focused on codebase understanding, bugfinding, planning, and code review\. - Improved grading criteria for some edit tasks\. ### CursorBench 3\.0 - Initial set of tasks focused on edit, refactor, and bugfix problems\. Avg cost / task is computed by applying each model's published[per\-million\-token pricing](https://cursor.com/docs/models-and-pricing)\(input, cache read, cache write, and output\) to the tokens it used on each CursorBench 3\.1 task, then averaging across tasks\. Results are subject to variance; small differences in scores may not be statistically meaningful\.