AI EVALUATION, IN CONTEXT.BY EQUALITY MACHINE

Model reports

ServerBench

Can a coding agent build a faster, correct model server and choose a sensible load? ServerBench gives it eight hours, then measures verified service value on fresh session replays.

Original paper v1, submitted 4 November 2026; three L40 deployments and Table 1. Reviewed 5 November; execution dates are unspecified.

Build the server and choose its load

The agent changes batching, scheduling, caching and kernels in an offline Harbor environment. AgentX replay preserves dependent turns, shared prefixes and parallel branches; content is reconstructed while lengths and dependencies remain. The three model/hardware tasks have different prices and latency thresholds.

ServerBench · original paper v1

Value per GPU dollar

Only completed requests meeting both frozen TTFT and TPOT limits contribute token value. GPU allocation and measurement duration form the denominator. Cached input is priced fully once per logical request. Development API spending is separate; this ratio is neither profit nor a percentage.

ServerBench · original paper v1

Verification determines score eligibility

Each agent/deployment gets eight development hours and a 1,800-second final replay. Maximum reasoning is used; GPT uses Codex and other agents Claude Code. The reported strongest verified submission can include one rerun for an anomalous failure. Fresh deployment, disjoint seeds, fidelity checks and human-assisted review precede scoring.

ServerBench · original paper v1

Gemma-4-E4B-it / 1×L40

Original Table 1. A failed verification has no numeric score; the 33 entries include 22 verified submissions. TTFT is in seconds and TPOT in milliseconds.

Table 1 · Gemma-4-E4B-it / 1×L40
Agent$ per $Concurrencyp90 TTFT (s)p90 TPOT (ms)
Claude Opus 5.52.47403.01118.59
Claude Sonnet 5.52.97322.7583.05
GPT 6 Astra1.75324.7794.19
GPT 6.1 Sol1.59244.4372.45
Claude Opus 51.15243.98109.12
GPT 6 Sol0.5553.63110.52
Kimi K30.5268.6755.32
Qwen3.8-Max-09020.87142.6159.16
MiMo V2.6 Pro0.221043.63108.96
GLM 5.3Not passed———
DeepSeek V4.1 FlashNot passed———

Not passed retains an unscored verification failure; it is not zero.

ServerBench · original paper v1

Qwen3.5-9B / 2×L40

Original Table 1. A failed verification has no numeric score; the 33 entries include 22 verified submissions. TTFT is in seconds and TPOT in milliseconds.

Table 1 · Qwen3.5-9B / 2×L40
Agent$ per $Concurrencyp90 TTFT (s)p90 TPOT (ms)
Claude Opus 5.54.40162.2528.16
Claude Sonnet 5.54.342012.3426.76
GPT 6 Astra3.181215.6221.94
GPT 6.1 Sol2.8442.7123.67
Claude Opus 51.1615.5128.09
GPT 6 Sol1.11113.1920.45
Kimi K30.9314.9933.12
Qwen3.8-Max-0902Not passed———
MiMo V2.6 ProNot passed———
GLM 5.3Not passed———
DeepSeek V4.1 FlashNot passed———

Not passed retains an unscored verification failure; it is not zero.

ServerBench · original paper v1

Qwen3.8-27B-INT4 / 2×L40

Original Table 1. A failed verification has no numeric score; the 33 entries include 22 verified submissions. TTFT is in seconds and TPOT in milliseconds.

Table 1 · Qwen3.8-27B-INT4 / 2×L40
Agent$ per $Concurrencyp90 TTFT (s)p90 TPOT (ms)
Claude Opus 5.52.64811.4446.40
Claude Sonnet 5.52.011246.5747.35
GPT 6 Astra1.48412.9642.83
GPT 6.1 Sol0.98475.6643.31
Claude Opus 50.62633.5562.97
GPT 6 Sol0.262136.4849.53
Kimi K3Not passed———
Qwen3.8-Max-0902Not passed———
MiMo V2.6 ProNot passed———
GLM 5.3Not passed———
DeepSeek V4.1 FlashNot passed———

Not passed retains an unscored verification failure; it is not zero.

ServerBench · original paper v1

Framework reference systems

References average five independent replay seeds at fixed concurrency. They are framework deployments, separate from coding-agent submissions.

Table 1 · framework references
DeploymentFramework$ per $Concurrency
Gemma E4B / 1×L40vLLM v0.28.00.618
Gemma E4B / 1×L40SGLang v0.5.190.162
Qwen3.5 9B / 2×L40SGLang v0.5.191.621
Qwen3.5 9B / 2×L40vLLM v0.28.01.491
Qwen3.8 27B INT4 / 2×L40vLLM v0.28.01.471
Qwen3.8 27B INT4 / 2×L40SGLang v0.5.191.424

Framework references average five seeds; they are not agent-development runs.

ServerBench · original paper v1

Frozen deployment parameters

Changing the checkpoint, hardware, workload or inference policy requires recalibration. These are paper settings, not current commercial price quotes.

Table 2 · deployment parameters
ParameterQwen3.5 9BGemma E4BQwen3.8 27B INT4
GPU allocation2×L401×L402×L40
Context limit (tokens)1,048,576131,0721,048,576
Input price (USD / million tokens)0.10440.02000.0898
Output price (USD / million tokens)0.18550.10002.6570
TTFT target (s)4.100282.5269310.2988
TPOT target (ms)23.4974121.705748.3769
GPU cost (USD / GPU-hour)0.820.820.82
SGLang reference concurrency124
vLLM reference concurrency181

Paper-fixed prices and latency targets; hardware order follows original Table 2.

ServerBench · original paper v1

Development costs are a separate measurement

These API cost estimates reprice recorded token and cache usage at OpenRouter rates retrieved on 13 October 2026. They do not replace the allocated GPU denominator of the serving score.

Table 3 · development API estimates (USD)
AgentQwen3.5 9BGemma E4B
Claude Opus 5.599.69104.25
Claude Sonnet 5.578.6030.72
GPT 6 Astra110.81119.79
GPT 6.1 Sol13.0113.67
Claude Opus 5108.90104.37
GPT 6 Sol50.8835.93
Kimi K3126.9828.71
Qwen3.8-Max-090246.1343.33
MiMo V2.6 Pro6.3210.19
GLM 5.316.8010.79
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash1.642.07

USD estimates use rates retrieved on 13 October 2026, separate from serving GPU cost.

ServerBench · original paper v1

Fixed-load version comparisons

These ratios compare successive implementations on matched replay seeds, rather than adding agent models to the main table.

Table 4 · successive-version value ratios
SystemVersionsFixed concurrencyMatched-seed ratios
Opus 5.5 / Qwen3.5 9Bv1 → v2161.88, 1.32
Opus 5 / Qwen3.5 9Bv3 → v421.90, 1.67, 1.44
Sonnet 5.5 / Gemma E4Bv3 → v4321.24, 1.02, 1.05

Each listed ratio corresponds to one scoreable matched-seed comparison at the stated fixed load.

ServerBench · original paper v1

Controlled follow-up comparisons

These frozen-server follow-ups use fresh common seeds. Capacity changes Qwen v1 to v6 at concurrency 16; draft length changes Gemma K=3 to K=7 at concurrency 40; replay feedback compares two resumed Opus 5 Gemma servers. D is qualified value, G gross value and f the qualified share. All arms pass verification.

Table 5 · matched-seed follow-ups
ComparisonSeedD beforeD afterD ratioG ratiof ratio
CapacityD3.5334.7611.3481.1101.214
CapacityE4.2944.9601.1551.0741.076
Draft lengthD2.2402.3081.0301.0301.000
Draft lengthE2.4502.5441.0391.0291.009
Replay feedbackF0.7860.8881.1291.1121.015
Replay feedbackG0.8781.1481.3081.2431.052

After/before ratios describe controlled server variants, separate from the main agent comparison.

ServerBench · original paper v1

Read deployment-specific results

The score depends on price accounting, latency targets, offered concurrency and verification. Repeated replay of a frozen implementation differs from independent agent construction. The publication date is known; exact execution dates and full endpoint revisions require the campaign records.

ServerBench · original paper v1

Original publication

Original paper v1, submitted 4 November 2026; three L40 deployments and Table 1. Reviewed 5 November; execution dates are unspecified.

Reviewed 2026-11-05

Evidence available for this benchmark

This source record contains 22 numeric observations. The source distinguishes 9 model identities or configurations. A model may appear more than once; check the version, tools and run budget before comparing. Read results and row-level evidence →

Reported metric
latency-qualified token value per GPU dollar
Recorded unit
ratio
Metric direction
higher is better

Start with these resources

Cited documents and dates (1)

Evaluation context and evidence

Source
Model reports
Publisher
Not recorded
Benchmark release
2026-11-04
Collected
Not recorded
Modality
Not recorded

These are source-reported observations, not independent reruns by this site. Check the task version, evaluation protocol, unit and reporting date before comparing models. Results from different setups are not a universal ranking.

Reported results 22

Shown in source observation order, not ranked. Dates retain the precision provided by the source.

ModelValueUnitProtocolReported date and basisSource
MiMo V2.6 Pro0.22ratioPaper Table 1; Gemma-4-E4B-it / 1×L40; concurrency 10; maximum reasoning effort; Claude Code in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 2.52693 s, TPOT ≤ 121.7057 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
Qwen3.8-Max-09020.87ratioPaper Table 1; Gemma-4-E4B-it / 1×L40; concurrency 14; maximum reasoning effort; Claude Code in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 2.52693 s, TPOT ≤ 121.7057 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
Claude Opus 51.15ratioPaper Table 1; Gemma-4-E4B-it / 1×L40; concurrency 24; maximum reasoning effort; Claude Code in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 2.52693 s, TPOT ≤ 121.7057 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
GPT 6.1 Sol1.59ratioPaper Table 1; Gemma-4-E4B-it / 1×L40; concurrency 24; maximum reasoning effort; Codex in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 2.52693 s, TPOT ≤ 121.7057 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
Claude Sonnet 5.52.97ratioPaper Table 1; Gemma-4-E4B-it / 1×L40; concurrency 32; maximum reasoning effort; Claude Code in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 2.52693 s, TPOT ≤ 121.7057 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
GPT 6 Astra1.75ratioPaper Table 1; Gemma-4-E4B-it / 1×L40; concurrency 32; maximum reasoning effort; Codex in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 2.52693 s, TPOT ≤ 121.7057 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
Claude Opus 5.52.47ratioPaper Table 1; Gemma-4-E4B-it / 1×L40; concurrency 40; maximum reasoning effort; Claude Code in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 2.52693 s, TPOT ≤ 121.7057 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
GPT 6 Sol0.55ratioPaper Table 1; Gemma-4-E4B-it / 1×L40; concurrency 5; maximum reasoning effort; Codex in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 2.52693 s, TPOT ≤ 121.7057 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
Kimi K30.52ratioPaper Table 1; Gemma-4-E4B-it / 1×L40; concurrency 6; maximum reasoning effort; Claude Code in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 2.52693 s, TPOT ≤ 121.7057 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
GPT 6 Astra3.18ratioPaper Table 1; Qwen3.5-9B / 2×L40; concurrency 12; maximum reasoning effort; Codex in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 4.10028 s, TPOT ≤ 23.4974 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
Claude Opus 5.54.4ratioPaper Table 1; Qwen3.5-9B / 2×L40; concurrency 16; maximum reasoning effort; Claude Code in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 4.10028 s, TPOT ≤ 23.4974 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
Claude Opus 51.16ratioPaper Table 1; Qwen3.5-9B / 2×L40; concurrency 1; maximum reasoning effort; Claude Code in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 4.10028 s, TPOT ≤ 23.4974 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
Kimi K30.93ratioPaper Table 1; Qwen3.5-9B / 2×L40; concurrency 1; maximum reasoning effort; Claude Code in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 4.10028 s, TPOT ≤ 23.4974 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
GPT 6 Sol1.11ratioPaper Table 1; Qwen3.5-9B / 2×L40; concurrency 1; maximum reasoning effort; Codex in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 4.10028 s, TPOT ≤ 23.4974 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
Claude Sonnet 5.54.34ratioPaper Table 1; Qwen3.5-9B / 2×L40; concurrency 20; maximum reasoning effort; Claude Code in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 4.10028 s, TPOT ≤ 23.4974 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
GPT 6.1 Sol2.84ratioPaper Table 1; Qwen3.5-9B / 2×L40; concurrency 4; maximum reasoning effort; Codex in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 4.10028 s, TPOT ≤ 23.4974 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
Claude Sonnet 5.52.01ratioPaper Table 1; Qwen3.8-27B-INT4 / 2×L40; concurrency 12; maximum reasoning effort; Claude Code in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 10.2988 s, TPOT ≤ 48.3769 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
GPT 6 Sol0.26ratioPaper Table 1; Qwen3.8-27B-INT4 / 2×L40; concurrency 2; maximum reasoning effort; Codex in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 10.2988 s, TPOT ≤ 48.3769 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
GPT 6 Astra1.48ratioPaper Table 1; Qwen3.8-27B-INT4 / 2×L40; concurrency 4; maximum reasoning effort; Codex in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 10.2988 s, TPOT ≤ 48.3769 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
GPT 6.1 Sol0.98ratioPaper Table 1; Qwen3.8-27B-INT4 / 2×L40; concurrency 4; maximum reasoning effort; Codex in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 10.2988 s, TPOT ≤ 48.3769 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
Claude Opus 50.62ratioPaper Table 1; Qwen3.8-27B-INT4 / 2×L40; concurrency 6; maximum reasoning effort; Claude Code in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 10.2988 s, TPOT ≤ 48.3769 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results
Claude Opus 5.52.64ratioPaper Table 1; Qwen3.8-27B-INT4 / 2×L40; concurrency 8; maximum reasoning effort; Claude Code in Harbor; 8-hour development, 1800-second final replay, held-out seeds; strongest verified submission with at most one anomalous-failure rerun; TTFT ≤ 10.2988 s, TPOT ≤ 48.3769 ms; allocated GPU price $0.82/GPU-hour; paper-fixed input/output prices and full cached-prefix valuation; actual run dates and complete provider revision unspecified2026-11-04 · document_publicationServerBench v1 · original paper results