Introducing Real-SWE 1.1
By Snagnik DasSiddhant PaliwalJanak Sunil
Benchmarking frontier AI models on private, real-world, enterprise codebases.
Leaderboard
- Rank 1Claude Opus 5.5Resolution rate: 56.80%, one standard error either side: 53.5% to 60.1%
- Rank 2GPT 6 AstraResolution rate: 56.00%, one standard error either side: 54.4% to 57.6%
- Rank 3Claude Sonnet 5.5Resolution rate: 51.20%, one standard error either side: 49.0% to 53.4%
- Rank 4GPT 6.1 SolResolution rate: 47.20%, one standard error either side: 44.8% to 49.6%
- Rank 5Claude Fable 5.1Resolution rate: 45.60%, one standard error either side: 42.5% to 48.7%
- Rank 6Muse Wonder 1.0Resolution rate: 42.40%, one standard error either side: 39.9% to 44.9%
- Tied for rank 7
Gemini 4 ArgonResolution rate: 39.20%, one standard error either side: 35.9% to 42.5% - Tied for rank 7Kimi K3.1 ProResolution rate: 39.20%, one standard error either side: 35.8% to 42.6%
- Rank 9DeepSeek V4.1 FlashResolution rate: 38.40%, one standard error either side: 35.8% to 41.0%
- Rank 10Hy4 previewResolution rate: 33.60%, one standard error either side: 30.9% to 36.3%
- Rank 11Grok 4.7Resolution rate: 28.00%, one standard error either side: 25.3% to 30.7%
- Rank 12GLM-5.3Resolution rate: 26.40%, one standard error either side: 23.9% to 28.9%
- Rank 13Qwen3.8-Max primeResolution rate: 24.00%, one standard error either side: 21.2% to 26.8%
- Rank 14GPT 6 LunaResolution rate: 10.40%, one standard error either side: 8.5% to 12.3%
- Rank 15InklingResolution rate: 8.00%, one standard error either side: 6.5% to 9.5%
- Rank 16Seed 2.1 TurboResolution rate: 5.60%, one standard error either side: 4.1% to 7.1%
- Rank 17Nemotron 3 UltraResolution rate: 4.80%, one standard error either side: 3.4% to 6.2%
| Rank | Model | Resolution rate |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 56.80%, one standard error either side: 53.5% to 60.1% | |
| 2 | 56.00%, one standard error either side: 54.4% to 57.6% | |
| 3 | 51.20%, one standard error either side: 49.0% to 53.4% | |
| 4 | 47.20%, one standard error either side: 44.8% to 49.6% | |
| 5 | 45.60%, one standard error either side: 42.5% to 48.7% | |
| 6 | 42.40%, one standard error either side: 39.9% to 44.9% | |
| Tied for 7 | 39.20%, one standard error either side: 35.9% to 42.5% | |
| Tied for 7 | 39.20%, one standard error either side: 35.8% to 42.6% | |
| 9 | 38.40%, one standard error either side: 35.8% to 41.0% | |
| 10 | 33.60%, one standard error either side: 30.9% to 36.3% | |
| 11 | 28.00%, one standard error either side: 25.3% to 30.7% | |
| 12 | 26.40%, one standard error either side: 23.9% to 28.9% | |
| 13 | 24.00%, one standard error either side: 21.2% to 26.8% | |
| 14 | 10.40%, one standard error either side: 8.5% to 12.3% | |
| 15 | 8.00%, one standard error either side: 6.5% to 9.5% | |
| 16 | 5.60%, one standard error either side: 4.1% to 7.1% | |
| 17 | 4.80%, one standard error either side: 3.4% to 6.2% |
Resolution rate by estimated cost per rollout
| Model | Resolution rate | Estimated cost per rollout | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 56.80% | $13.95 | |
| 2 | 56.00% | $3.78 | |
| 3 | 51.20% | $10.09 | |
| 4 | 47.20% | $0.79 | |
| 5 | 45.60% | $14.24 | |
| 6 | 42.40% | $3.76 | |
| 7 | 39.20% | $4.66 | |
| 8 | 39.20% | $2.03 | |
| 9 | 38.40% | $0.19 | |
| 10 | 33.60% | $1.13 | |
| 11 | 28.00% | $2.66 | |
| 12 | 26.40% | $3.35 | |
| 13 | 24.00% | $7.06 | |
| 14 | 10.40% | $0.08 | |
| 15 | 8.00% | $5.13 | |
| 16 | 5.60% | $3.03 | |
| 17 | 4.80% | $1.39 | |
Introduction
Today we are releasing Real-SWE 1.1, a benchmark that evaluates frontier AI models on private, real-world, enterprise codebases. Each task comes from a private production codebase that we licensed from a real-world company. These are problems their engineers work on, with all the context and complexity that comes with an existing product. This release expands the benchmark to 25 tasks across TypeScript, Go, Python, Ruby and Java codebases and compares 17 models.
- Private codebases. Agents must navigate proprietary systems whose code and solutions aren’t available on the public internet.
- Work with business consequences. Getting billing right, calculating taxes, migrating customers. Changes that affect how a business runs, often across multiple services.
- Company-specific complexity. Every company has its own rules and ways of writing code. Agents have to understand those conventions and make changes that work with what’s already there.
Can a coding agent actually do the work of a software engineer in the real world?
Expert-generated or synthetic tasks can be well designed, but they aren’t the verbatim, actual tasks that engineers in real companies need to do. Our tasks differ on two axes: the underlying coding artifact and specificity of the instruction. Both add complexities that challenge today’s frontier models.
We use native harnesses to reflect how enterprise engineers work in practice, evaluating model-and-harness combinations rather than models in isolation.
Real company tasks require company-specific context
Correct billing depends on business rules and external services
Fix invoice billing so each business charges the right tax and exempt customers aren't taxed.
View instructionHide instruction
Billing reopens on Monday and every invoice this service issues is coming out untaxed. Each business on the platform settles its tax a different way: some maintain a rate themselves, some want each invoice priced against the buyer's destination by our tax authority provider, and some collect nothing at all, while a customer we hold an exemption for is charged nothing whichever way its business is configured. Pricing a destination means going to the authority with both addresses, the priced lines and the product category that business sells under, on the sandbox or the production authority according to the account the business is on; an address the authority refuses must be reported without stopping the invoice. The rate, the tax and the gross belong on the issued invoice, and once an invoice is settled the sale is filed back to the authority under that invoice's number so the returns reconcile. Invoices between European parties show both sides' VAT registrations. The authority and ledger are available at TAX_JAR_URL, PROD_TAX_JAR_URL and INFLUX_URL.
- TaxJar sandbox
- TaxJar production
- InfluxDB ledger
- NestJS service
- TypeScript
Agents work across code, infrastructure, and business tools
Tools and services across Real-SWE task environments. Each task exposes only the services its workflow needs.
- TypeScript
- Node.js
- Python
- Go
- Ruby
- Java
- NestJS
- Next.js
- React
- Django
- Flask
- Rails
- Spring Boot
- PostgreSQL
- SQLite
- Redis
- Gel
- InfluxDB
- Docker
- Kubernetes
- AWS emulator
- Firestore emulator
- Supabase stand-in
- Linear MCP
- TaxJar
- Stripe
Codebase Selection
We selected codebases through a rigorous screening process, focusing on real companies with substantial usage, strong engineering teams, and demanding production workloads. The tasks come from these codebases, including:
- A Luma/Partiful competitor with 200K+ users and a top 100 App Store ranking
- A consumer fintech platform processing 100K+ bank statements
- Enterprise AI sales platforms supporting complex business workflows
We prioritize code written to meet an actual user or business need over code written solely to create a benchmark task. Production engineering requires understanding existing architecture, preserving behavior that users rely on, and making changes within real operational constraints.
Brief instructions can require changes across many files
Our tasks describe the change needed, leaving agents to discover implementation details in the codebase and surrounding tools. Any behavior required by the verifier must be stated or reasonably discoverable. This leads to our prompts being slightly underspecified, shorter than DeepSWE and Terminal Bench, but specific enough to not omit instructions.
The work is cross-functional and complex: a single change can span multiple parts of the application. Agents must understand existing business logic and company coding patterns while keeping the surrounding system working.
A typical Real-SWE instruction is 1,208 characters, shorter than DeepSWE's and Terminal-Bench 3's but longer than FrontierCode's and FrontierSWE v2's.
- Real-SWE1,208 chars
- FrontierCode982 chars
- DeepSWE1,975 chars
- Terminal-Bench 31,584 chars
- FrontierSWE v2992 chars
On average, a Real-SWE reference solution edits 10.2 files.
- Real-SWE10.2
- FrontierCode6
- DeepSWE6
Every task is inspired or lifted verbatim from a private, real-world codebase. We find these types of tasks super interesting for three reasons:
- Tasks on private codebases are natively out of distribution. These types of coding tasks are not available anywhere on the internet and are unlikely to have ever been trained on by any other ai model. 99% of tokens in real-world enterprises are hidden away from the frontier models.
- These tasks are economically viable work. Each task here has a direct relationship to spend and was assigned to an engineer earning a salary. Most benchmarks test interesting, experimental capabilities that are often unlikely to be widespread in the real-world.
- Company-specific engineering patterns matter. Does AI code match the bar of a real-world enterprise? Our results show us that we're far from that reality. Many enterprises care about code standards and patterns. We've found that today's models are weaker at understanding company coding patterns and frequently miss requirements or don't verify their assumptions.
Analysis
Here's an analysis of all the tasks from our benchmark. If you're interested in a sample of the tasks, request access here.
Unverified assumptions are the most common failure
Failures are grouped by observed submission behavior using the same taxonomy across models, following DeepSWE.
Different models fail in different ways
Percentages are out of each model's failed runs, not all runs.
| Model | Unverified assumption | Missed requirement | Misunderstood task | Integration error | Wrong logic | Regression | Wrong file |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All models | 33.4% | 29.2% | 16.2% | 15.2% | 3.0% | 2.1% | 0.8% |
| 22.2% | 11.1% | 38.9% | 18.5% | 1.9% | 5.6% | 1.9% | |
| 58.2% | 0% | 16.4% | 23.6% | 0% | 1.8% | 0% | |
| 34.4% | 19.7% | 29.5% | 14.8% | 0% | 1.6% | 0% | |
| 53.0% | 1.5% | 13.6% | 22.7% | 0% | 9.1% | 0% | |
| 22.1% | 29.4% | 20.6% | 27.9% | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| 12.5% | 55.6% | 13.9% | 16.7% | 1.4% | 0% | 0% | |
| 13.2% | 13.2% | 50.0% | 5.3% | 14.5% | 3.9% | 0% | |
| 53.9% | 9.2% | 15.8% | 10.5% | 10.5% | 0% | 0% | |
| 28.6% | 41.6% | 16.9% | 5.2% | 1.3% | 6.5% | 0% | |
| 10.8% | 39.8% | 10.8% | 31.3% | 1.2% | 1.2% | 4.8% | |
| 35.6% | 35.6% | 13.3% | 12.2% | 2.2% | 0% | 1.1% | |
| 22.8% | 32.6% | 18.5% | 19.6% | 5.4% | 0% | 1.1% | |
| 40.0% | 26.3% | 17.9% | 15.8% | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| 41.1% | 17.9% | 15.2% | 21.4% | 0% | 3.6% | 0.9% | |
| 33.9% | 44.3% | 3.5% | 10.4% | 6.1% | 1.7% | 0% | |
| 37.3% | 43.2% | 6.8% | 9.3% | 1.7% | 0.8% | 0.8% | |
| 43.7% | 39.5% | 3.4% | 5.0% | 3.4% | 2.5% | 2.5% |
- Unverified assumption
- Builds on a guess about the system instead of checking it in the workspace.
- Missed requirement
- Leaves out behavior the instruction requires.
- Misunderstood task
- Misreads the requested behavior, including how the stated requirements and rules fit together.
- Integration error
- Right idea, wired into the surrounding system incorrectly.
- Wrong logic
- Right requirement and inputs, wrong calculation or transformation.
- Regression
- Breaks existing behavior while making the change.
- Wrong file
- Puts the change in a different file or layer from the one the graded behavior runs through, such as a duplicate or unused path.
Efficiency & the Frontier
Estimated rollout costs range from $0.08 to $14.24
| Rank | Model | Estimated cost (USD) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT 6 Luna | $0.08 |
| 2 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | $0.19 |
| 3 | GPT 6.1 Sol | $0.79 |
| 4 | Hy4 preview | $1.13 |
| 5 | Nemotron 3 Ultra | $1.39 |
| 6 | Kimi K3.1 Pro | $2.03 |
| 7 | Grok 4.7 | $2.66 |
| 8 | Seed 2.1 Turbo | $3.03 |
| 9 | GLM-5.3 | $3.35 |
| 10 | Muse Wonder 1.0 | $3.76 |
| 11 | GPT 6 Astra | $3.78 |
| 12 | Gemini 4 Argon | $4.66 |
| 13 | Inkling | $5.13 |
| 14 | Qwen3.8-Max prime | $7.06 |
| 15 | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | $10.09 |
| 16 | Claude Opus 5.5 | $13.95 |
| 17 | Claude Fable 5.1 | $14.24 |
Effort per rollout, by task
Swipe the chart to see all tasks.
Use the left and right arrow keys, Home and End to move between this model’s tasks. Escape closes the details.
View task values
- Opus 5.585k
- GPT 6 Astra11k
- Sonnet 5.5113k
- GPT 6.1 Sol15k
- Fable 5.163k
- Muse Wonder 1.026k
- Gemini 4 Argon64k
- Kimi K3.1 Pro21k
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash48k
- Hy4 preview48k
- Grok 4.723k
- GLM-5.3185k
- Qwen3.8-Max prime36k
- GPT 6 Luna25k
- Inkling21k
- Seed 2.1 Turbo30k
- Nemotron 3 Ultra33k
| Model | Task 1 | Task 2 | Task 3 | Task 4 | Task 5 | Task 6 | Task 7 | Task 8 | Task 9 | Task 10 | Task 11 | Task 12 | Task 13 | Task 14 | Task 15 | Task 16 | Task 17 | Task 18 | Task 19 | Task 20 | Task 21 | Task 22 | Task 23 | Task 24 | Task 25 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Opus 5.5 | 85k | 186k | 318k | 333k | 728k | 273k | 553k | 240k | 139k | 390k | 143k | 543k | 282k | 325k | 428k | 195k | 172k | 190k | 252k | 179k | 414k | 348k | 206k | 247k | 129k |
| GPT 6 Astra | 11k | 17k | 26k | 23k | 36k | 17k | 19k | 21k | 13k | 22k | 17k | 32k | 38k | 24k | 42k | 25k | 22k | 23k | 25k | 23k | 25k | 36k | 21k | 18k | 17k |
| Sonnet 5.5 | 113k | 180k | 243k | 368k | 449k | 366k | 470k | 468k | 151k | 458k | 139k | 700k | 605k | 412k | 1875k | 262k | 211k | 372k | 352k | 245k | 251k | 411k | 151k | 270k | 188k |
| GPT 6.1 Sol | 15k | 23k | 34k | 31k | 53k | 23k | 33k | 30k | 17k | 27k | 20k | 45k | 47k | 29k | 54k | 31k | 31k | 29k | 27k | 32k | 36k | 44k | 32k | 27k | 29k |
| Fable 5.1 | 63k | 93k | 112k | 119k | 151k | 107k | 140k | 128k | 80k | 104k | 61k | 132k | 133k | 84k | 212k | 85k | 72k | 99k | 97k | 93k | 99k | 131k | 88k | 84k | 63k |
| Muse Wonder 1.0 | 26k | 25k | 46k | 38k | 56k | 41k | 46k | 46k | 20k | 41k | 26k | 42k | 49k | 34k | 92k | 31k | 26k | 56k | 42k | 44k | 36k | 41k | 41k | 36k | 30k |
| Gemini 4 Argon | 64k | 75k | 123k | 207k | 261k | 142k | 188k | 142k | 37k | 89k | 56k | 193k | 147k | 85k | 135k | 135k | 65k | 144k | 116k | 118k | 135k | 125k | 144k | 372k | 101k |
| Kimi K3.1 Pro | 21k | 27k | 54k | 38k | 52k | 38k | 41k | 41k | 26k | 40k | 30k | 72k | 68k | 33k | 80k | 38k | 27k | 50k | 44k | 46k | 42k | 44k | 36k | 46k | 30k |
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | 48k | 71k | 82k | 102k | 133k | 93k | 121k | 79k | 48k | 110k | 104k | 116k | 118k | 94k | 223k | 105k | 54k | 170k | 110k | 116k | 119k | 116k | 119k | 101k | 70k |
| Hy4 preview | 48k | 85k | 105k | 171k | 140k | 74k | 84k | 70k | 49k | 80k | 96k | 99k | 113k | 79k | 256k | 68k | 61k | 105k | 70k | 87k | 56k | 104k | 57k | 61k | 77k |
| Grok 4.7 | 23k | 29k | 22k | 36k | 57k | 33k | 33k | 41k | 17k | 50k | 30k | 43k | 73k | 61k | 91k | 37k | 18k | 40k | 37k | 37k | 23k | 39k | 46k | 45k | 31k |
| GLM-5.3 | 185k | 358k | 395k | 415k | 656k | 263k | 333k | 278k | 206k | 663k | 319k | 695k | 318k | 561k | 278k | 485k | 405k | 589k | 245k | 804k | 218k | 366k | 297k | 708k | 343k |
| Qwen3.8-Max prime | 36k | 59k | 63k | 54k | 98k | 77k | 70k | 93k | 38k | 73k | 45k | 73k | 105k | 75k | 254k | 57k | 48k | 116k | 105k | 90k | 61k | 85k | 88k | 61k | 61k |
| GPT 6 Luna | 25k | 20k | 40k | 32k | 67k | 40k | 52k | 48k | 22k | 52k | 23k | 75k | 78k | 23k | 119k | 32k | 17k | 59k | 23k | 61k | 37k | 66k | 51k | 41k | 35k |
| Inkling | 21k | 15k | 21k | 24k | 22k | 28k | 25k | 30k | 18k | 32k | 28k | 28k | 29k | 25k | 28k | 30k | 22k | 34k | 22k | 28k | 22k | 21k | 19k | 27k | 23k |
| Seed 2.1 Turbo | 30k | 19k | 25k | 23k | 38k | 27k | 17k | 30k | 21k | 25k | 25k | 23k | 40k | 26k | 77k | 20k | 14k | 69k | 31k | 30k | 23k | 34k | 25k | 31k | 28k |
| Nemotron 3 Ultra | 33k | 26k | 40k | 22k | 39k | 38k | 38k | 43k | 22k | 33k | 20k | 31k | 86k | 46k | 68k | 32k | 29k | 52k | 32k | 32k | 25k | 43k | 25k | 36k | 30k |
Evaluation Setup
Each agent was run in an isolated sandbox. All tasks are in Harbor format, and verifiers are injected at grading time. The verifiers are inspired by existing test suites in the codebase or use those tests verbatim.
Harness for each model
| Model | Harness |
|---|---|
| Claude Opus 5.5 | Claude Code |
| GPT 6 Astra | Codex CLI |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Claude Code |
| GPT 6.1 Sol | Codex CLI |
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Claude Code |
| Muse Wonder 1.0 | Muse Code |
| Gemini 4 Argon | Antigravity CLI |
| Kimi K3.1 Pro | Kimi Code |
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | mini-swe-agent |
| Hy4 preview | mini-swe-agent |
| Grok 4.7 | Grok Build |
| GLM-5.3 | Claude Code |
| Qwen3.8-Max prime | Qwen Code |
| GPT 6 Luna | Codex CLI |
| Inkling | mini-swe-agent |
| Seed 2.1 Turbo | mini-swe-agent |
| Nemotron 3 Ultra | mini-swe-agent |