New: Claude Fable 5.2 eval report is here.Read the report ↗

Best LLMs for mergeable code changes

FrontierCode

Tests whether an agent can produce software changes that meet functional and review requirements, helping you assess how much implementation work you could delegate before human code review. Scores cover 132 tasks and depend on the agent setup and effort level.

Updated: Data as of:
Limited reportingNot saturated
Official benchmark
FrontierCode results. Each row identifies its benchmark version and evaluation track. Scores from different versions are not directly comparable. Best effort from the latest stored report date per model and version.
Model / creatorVersionReported score
Claude Fable 5.2Anthropic · Proprietary2.0 / independent mini-swe-agent49.128%
Claude Fable 5.2Anthropic · Proprietary2.0 / Cognition native agents49.1%
Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic · Proprietary2.0 / Cognition native agents45.5%
GPT-6 AstraOpenAI · Proprietary2.0 / Cognition native agents42.8%
Gemini 4 CarbonGoogle · Proprietary2.0 / Cognition native agents41.1%
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic · Proprietary2.0 / Cognition native agents32.4%
View all 10 published reports
2.0 / Cognition native agents

effort: xhigh · Cognition evaluation; 132 tasks, mean@5; Claude Code; highest-performing effort is xhigh, not max. · Tools enabled

Anthropic ↗
2.0 / Cognition native agents

effort: max · November 9 launch-table comparison; highest available effort unless explicitly noted. Preserve the benchmark track and model configuration; competitor figures are as reported by Anthropic. · Tools enabled

Anthropic ↗
2.0 / Cognition native agents

effort: max · November 9 launch-table comparison; highest available effort unless explicitly noted. Preserve the benchmark track and model configuration; competitor figures are as reported by Anthropic. · Tools enabled

Anthropic ↗
2.0 / Cognition native agents

effort: medium · November 9 launch-table comparison; highest available effort unless explicitly noted. Preserve the benchmark track and model configuration; competitor figures are as reported by Anthropic. · Tools enabled

Anthropic ↗
2.0 / Cognition native agents

effort: xhigh · November 9 launch-table comparison; highest available effort unless explicitly noted. Preserve the benchmark track and model configuration; competitor figures are as reported by Anthropic. · Tools enabled

Anthropic ↗
2.0 / independent mini-swe-agent

effort: high · Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback); exact independent record; implementation per archived benchmarking methodology. · Tools enabled

2.0 / independent mini-swe-agent

effort: max · Claude Fable 5.2 (Max, Default Fallback); exact independent record; implementation per archived benchmarking methodology. · Tools enabled

2.0 / independent mini-swe-agent

effort: xhigh · Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhigh, Default Fallback); exact independent record; implementation per archived benchmarking methodology. · Tools enabled

2.0 / independent mini-swe-agent

effort: medium · Claude Fable 5.2 (Medium, Default Fallback); exact independent record; implementation per archived benchmarking methodology. · Tools enabled

2.0 / independent mini-swe-agent

effort: low · Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback); exact independent record; implementation per archived benchmarking methodology. · Tools enabled