Skip to main content
BenchLM
Data

Data as of November 4, 2026 · How the score is built

CurrentWeight access pendingReasoning

Released Nov 4, 20261M contextTencent Hy4 launch post

Hy4

Decision readingHy4 is tracked, but not publicly ranked yet. The profile exposes 15 sourced benchmark rows and leaves unsupported fields blank until a published record exists.

Released Nov 4, 2026 — see all recent releases

Decision snapshot

Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.

Capability

Unranked

field median 50.5Not eligible for a public rank

Price

$0.83input / $2.50 output

input median $0.75cached $0.042 · blended $1.67

Speed

Not measured

field median 92 tok/sTime to first token not measured

Context

1Mtokens

field median 256,000Maximum output length is tracked separately

Strongest published evidence

Published rows are visible, but no category has enough eligible evidence for a comparative rank.

Validate before choosing

15 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. Independent runtime speed has not been measured.

Source-linked · 15 displayable benchmark rows

Category score record

Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.

Category scores, ranks, weighting, benchmark coverage, and evidence status
CategoryScore
AgenticRank Not rankedWeight 22%7 benchmarksVerified
80.4
CodingWeight 20%5 benchmarksVerified
Score pending
ReasoningWeight 17%0 benchmarksNot measured
Not measured
MultimodalRank Not rankedWeight 12%2 benchmarksVerified
78.8
KnowledgeRank Not rankedWeight 12%1 benchmarkVerified
83.4
MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured
Not measured
Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured
Not measured
MathWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured
Not measured

15 of 797 tracked benchmark slots have displayable evidence · bars run 0–100

Coverage details

How much of this is verified

Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.

  1. Agentic7/7 verified
  2. Coding5/5 verified
  3. ReasoningNot measured
  4. Multimodal2/2 verified
  5. Knowledge1/1 verified
  6. MultilingualNot measured
  7. Inst. FollowingNot measured
  8. MathNot measured
Verified sourceProvisionalNot measured

Benchmark ledger

Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.

Coding5 rows
Coding benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
DeepSWEScore74.9%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Muse Wonder Full · 79.0%

Gap4.1 behindWeightDisplay only
sweMarathonScore43.8%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Step 5 Preview · 72.7%

Gap28.9 behindWeightDisplay only
ProgramBenchProgramBench: Can Language Models Rebuild Programs From Scratch?Score30.0%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 93.0%

Gap63 behindWeightDisplay only
FrontierCode 2.0Score31.0%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 45.5%

Gap14.5 behindWeightDisplay only
PostTrainBench v1.2Score35.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Kimi K3.1 Pro · 36.5%

Gap1.3 behindWeightDisplay only
Agentic7 rows
Agentic benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
Terminal-Bench 4.0Score44.40%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Sonnet 5.5 · 70.60%

Gap26.2 behindWeightDisplay only
AutomationBenchScore56.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: MiniMax M3.1 Flash · 62.2%

Gap6 behindWeightDisplay only
HLE w/ toolsHumanity's Last Exam with toolsScore59.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Kimi K3.1 Pro · 70.0%

Gap10.9 behindWeightDisplay only
Agents' Last ExamScore41.0%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-6.1 Terra · 60.0%

Gap19 behindWeightDisplay only
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1Score19.8%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 64.6%

Gap44.8 behindWeightDisplay only
APEX-AgentsScore75.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Hy4 · 75.2%

GapBest verifiedWeightDisplay only
OSWorld 2.1OSWorld 2.1 (all 108 tasks)Score78.9%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 81.8%

Gap2.9 behindWeightDisplay only
Multimodal2 rows
Multimodal benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
MMMU-ProMassive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding ProScore78.6%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-6.1 Terra · 85.5%

Gap6.9 behindWeightDisplay only
ZeroBench w/ PythonZeroBench_main with PythonScore55.4%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Kimi K3.1 Pro · 63.0%

Gap7.6 behindWeightDisplay only
Knowledge1 row
Knowledge benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
HLEHumanity's Last ExamScore59.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Kimi K3.1 Pro · 70%

Gap10.9 behindWeightDisplay only

Bars run 0–100; the dark tick marks the best source-verified value

All 15 rows

Lineage

The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Each score is estimated for that model; a relative can inform a sparse estimate but never sets a floor, so a newer release can score below an earlier one. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.

  1. Apr 23, 2026

    Hy3 Preview

    Score 53.0 · Price not listed

  2. Jul 6, 2026

    Hy3

    Not publicly ranked · Price not listed

  3. Aug 28, 2026

    Hy4 preview

    Score 61.5 · Price not listed

  4. Nov 4, 2026 · you are here

    Hy4

    Not publicly ranked · $0.834 / $2.501

Spec sheet

Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.

Maximum output
Not sourced yet
Knowledge cutoff
Not sourced yet
Input modalities
Not sourced yet
Output modalities
Not sourced yet
Parameters
Not sourced yet
Availability
Tencent serves Hy4 through Tencent Cloud TokenHub and OpenRouter (tencent/hy4) and in CodeBuddy, WorkBuddy, Yuanbao, and ima. Tencent says it plans to open-source the weights with vLLM and SGLang support and a system card, but no checkpoint is public yet, so source type stays pending.
Cloud regions
Not tracked yet
Lifecycle
Current
API capabilities
Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
Prompt caching
Published at $0.042 per million cached input tokensTencent Cloud TokenHub model pricing
Self-host
Weight availability is pending
Rate limits
Not tracked yet

How to read this profile

The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.

We track Hy4, but the public leaderboard excludes this profile until enough non-generated benchmark coverage is available. Only published rows appear above.

Hy4 has no verified publication yet for weight access. Its 1M context window is documented separately from that pending weight status. The profile records its reasoning mode as reasoning.

Tencent serves Hy4 through Tencent Cloud TokenHub and OpenRouter (tencent/hy4) and in CodeBuddy, WorkBuddy, Yuanbao, and ima. Tencent says it plans to open-source the weights with vLLM and SGLang support and a system card, but no checkpoint is public yet, so source type stays pending.

Official exact-value snapshot from Tencent's November 4, 2026 Hy4 launch post and its benchmark appendix, at the highest available reasoning setting. Hy4 scales pre-training and post-training over Hy4 preview and adds image input and computer use for the first time. We map DeepSWE v1.1, SWE-Marathon v1.1, ProgramBench (almost solved), Terminal-Bench 4.0, FrontierCode 2.0, APEX-Agents v1.1, Agents' Last Exam v1.1, AutomationBench v1.0.6 (600 public tasks), HLE with tools, Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1, PostTrainBench v1.2, OSWorld 2.1 (full set, partial score), MMMU-Pro, and ZeroBench main with tools (pass@5) onto existing lanes. Tencent's internal rows (Hy-CompanyBench 2.0, Hy-SWE Max Verified 2.0, Hy-Backend 3.0, WebCraftBench, GameFix Bench 2.0, 3DArena-Modeling, Goal2Repo, AutoCatBench, Hy-LifeSearch, Hy-BrowseComp 2.0, E-Bench 2.0, Agents' First Exam-IF, Tag-bench, PPTGen-Bench, Hy-FrontierMath T5, ProofBench, Foundation Model Bench, TenureTrail, BuddyVQA Atlas) and partner evaluations (IRAB 61.63, Caidazi single-stock research 4.27/5) stay in this note. Tencent notes that some Hy4 preview figures in the new appendix differ from its August report because the harness, judge model, and anti-hacking checks changed; the Hy4 preview row keeps its originally published values. OpenRouter lists a 1,048,576-token context window and text plus image input.

Hy4 sits in the Hy4 family with Hy4 preview. Its explicit predecessor is Hy4 preview. 15 of 797 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.

Last updated November 4, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.

Questions

How does Hy4 perform overall in AI benchmarks?

Hy4 has 15 source-displayable benchmark rows, but it does not qualify for a public overall rank. The available rows remain visible by category without being converted into a site-wide score. Missing evidence stays blank instead of being estimated from an earlier model.

Is Hy4 good for knowledge and understanding?

Hy4 has source-displayable benchmark coverage for knowledge and understanding, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.

Is Hy4 good for coding and programming?

Hy4 has source-displayable benchmark coverage for coding and programming, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.

Is Hy4 good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?

Hy4 has source-displayable benchmark coverage for agentic tool use and computer tasks, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.

Is Hy4 good for multimodal and grounded tasks?

Hy4 has source-displayable benchmark coverage for multimodal and grounded tasks, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.

Which sibling models are related to Hy4?

Hy4 belongs to the Hy4 family. Related tracked variants include Hy4 preview. A sibling link indicates shared lineage or a documented configuration relationship; it does not mean the variants have identical pricing, context limits, benchmark evidence, or deployment behavior. Compare before switching.

Does Hy4 have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?

No. Hy4 currently has 15 source-displayable rows. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.

What is the context window size of Hy4?

Hy4 has a documented context window of 1M. That figure is the maximum combined prompt and retained-conversation space reported for this exact model; it is not the maximum output length. The profile keeps output limits separate because providers often publish those limits independently.

Watch Hy4 in the weekly brief

Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 6,100+ subscribers.

Compare Hy4 with every tracked model1007 comparisons