Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
K-Exaone is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 49 to 45. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
K-Exaone's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 49.4 against 23.
K-Exaone gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 200K for o1-pro.
Pick K-Exaone if you want the stronger benchmark profile. o1-pro only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.
K-Exaone
49.4
o1-pro
23
Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.
Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.
Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.
Benchmark data for this category is coming soon.
Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.
Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.
K-Exaone is ahead overall, 49 to 45.
K-Exaone has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 49.4 versus 23. o1-pro stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.