#Terminal-Bench

Tutorials, deep dives and product notes — built for developers.

Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Gemini 3.5 Flash: The Enterprise King vs The Agentic Speedster

Google's two best models face off. Gemini 3.1 Pro leads on reasoning (HLE +4.2, MRCR +7.6, ARC-AGI-2 +5.0). Gemini 3.5 Flash dominates agents & coding (+14.9 Finance, +5.9 Terminal-Bench, +5.4 MCP Atlas), is 25% cheaper, and 4× faster. All data from Google DeepMind's official model card.

· CodingFleet

GPT-5.5 vs Kimi K2.6: Tied on Pro — Separated by Everything Else

GPT-5.5 and Kimi K2.6 are tied at 58.6% SWE-bench Pro. But Kimi leads HLE w/tools (54.0%), DeepSearchQA (+13.9), and Agent Swarm (300 sub-agents). GPT counters with OSWorld (+1.9), BrowseComp, Terminal-Bench (Codex CLI 82.7%), and 7.5× higher cost. The most evenly matched comparison of 2026.

· CodingFleet

Claude Opus 4.8 vs MiniMax M3: The $25 Proprietary King vs The $1.20 Open-Weight Challenger

Claude Opus 4.8 (69.2% Pro, $25/1M, AA Index #1) vs MiniMax M3 (59.0%, $1.20/1M, open-weight + video). Opus dominates 5 of 6 shared benchmarks by 8-13 points. But M3 is 21× cheaper, open-weight, and wins BrowseComp (-4.2). Full comparison with VP of VentureBeat research plus MiniMax/Minimax blog data.

· CodingFleet

GPT-5.5 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash: OpenAI's Agentic Flagship vs Google's Speed Demon

GPT-5.5 (82.7% Terminal-Bench, 58.6% Pro, $30/1M) vs Gemini 3.5 Flash (83.6% MCP Atlas, 76.2% TB 2.1, $9/1M, 152 tok/s). GPT-5.5 dominates reasoning & long context. Flash dominates tool orchestration & speed. Official Google DeepMind model card data. 10-point verdict.

· CodingFleet

Qwen 3.7 Max vs Kimi K2.6: Agent Frontier Meets Agent Swarm

Qwen 3.7 Max (60.6% SWE-bench Pro, $7.50/1M, Anthropic API compatible) vs Kimi K2.6 (58.6%, $4.00/1M, 300 sub-agent swarms). Qwen leads all 6 shared benchmarks — but Kimi counters with open-weight, BrowseComp Agent Swarm (86.3%), and HLE w/tools (54%). Full comparison with real benchmark data.

· CodingFleet

Gemini 3.1 Pro vs GPT-5.5: Google's Enterprise Workhorse vs OpenAI's Agentic Flagship

GPT-5.5 dominates agentic coding (+14.2 Terminal-Bench, +4.4 SWE-bench Pro). Gemini 3.1 Pro wins on price (2.5× cheaper), reasoning (GPQA 94.3%), and multimodal breadth. Real benchmarks, pricing analysis, and a 9-point decision matrix for choosing the right enterprise model.

· CodingFleet

MiniMax M3 vs GPT-5.5: Open-Weight Multimodal vs Proprietary Agent

MiniMax M3 (59.0% SWE-bench Pro, $1.20/1M) beats GPT-5.5 (58.6%, $30/1M) on the hardest coding benchmark at 25× less cost. But GPT-5.5 dominates Terminal-Bench (+16.7), OSWorld (+8.7), GPQA and HLE. 1M context, native video, MSA architecture, open-weight vs proprietary. Full comparison.

Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Opus 4.8: Mythos Meets the Former King

Anthropic's new Mythos-class Fable 5 (80.3% SWE-bench Pro, $50/1M) vs the outgoing flagship Opus 4.8 (69.2%, $25/1M). Fable 5 dominates every benchmark — but costs 2× more, hallucinates more, and sometimes falls back to Opus 4.8 anyway. Full 30-benchmark comparison.

Claude Fable 5 — The Complete Review: Mythos for the Masses

The complete Claude Fable 5 review. Mythos-class for everyone. 80.3% Pro, 88.0% Terminal-Bench, 93.9% Verified. Stripe's 50M-line migration in a day. Karpathy: "major-version-bump-deserving." Simon Willison: "a beast." Safety classifiers, $10/$50 pricing, and why this is the biggest step toward AGI yet.

· CodingFleet

Claude Fable 5 vs GPT-5.5: The Mythos Model Meets OpenAI's Flagship

Claude Fable 5 ($50/1M) vs GPT-5.5 ($30/1M). Fable 5 leads all 8 coding benchmarks (+11.8 avg). GPT-5.5 counters with lower price and Batch/Flex at $15. 5× better Pro value from Fable 5. The definitive head-to-head comparison.

· CodingFleet

Claude Fable 5 vs GPT-5.5 Pro: The $50 Mythos Model vs the $180 Parallel Compute

Claude Fable 5 ($50/1M) vs GPT-5.5 Pro ($180/1M). Fable 5 leads all 8 coding benchmarks by +11.8 pts avg. GPT-5.5 Pro fights back on BrowseComp (90.1%) and FrontierMath (39.6%) via parallel compute — but has no published Pro coding scores. Updated with separate GPT-5.5 Pro benchmarks.

· CodingFleet

DeepSeek V4 Flash vs Qwen 3.6 Flash: The Chinese Flash Showdown

DeepSeek V4 Flash ($0.28/1M, MIT, 284B) vs Qwen 3.6 Flash ($0.90/1M, Apache 2.0, 35B/3B). V4 leads every coding benchmark (Pro +3.1, HLE +13.4, LiveCodeBench +11.2). Qwen counters with multimodal (text+image+video), speed (90-172 tok/s), and tiny 3B active params. Chinese Flash showdown.

· CodingFleet