Tencent · Model release
Data as of October 13, 2026 · How the score is built
Released Aug 28, 20261M contextTencent Hy4 preview model card
Hy4 preview
Decision readingHy4 preview scores 60.9 out of 100 and ranks #48 of 220. This profile shows 30 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Coding at #26. Published weights can be self-hosted, but infrastructure cost varies and is not a comparable API token rate.
Released Aug 28, 2026 — see all recent releases
Hy4 preview will be repriced, updated or retired. Get each notice with its source and date. Follow model changes
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
60.9/100
field median 49.9#48 of 220 ranked models
Public
#48of 220
Verified —
Price
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
input median $0.78No comparable first-party hosted token rate
Speed
Not measured
field median 90 tok/sTime to first token not measured
Context
1Mtokens
field median 256,000Maximum output length is tracked separately
Strongest published evidence
Coding ranks #26. Particularly well-suited for software development and code generation tasks.
Validate before choosing
30 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. No comparable first-party API token rate is published.
Source-linked · 30 displayable benchmark rows
Follow model changesCategory 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 | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticRank #37 of 123Percentile 70thWeight 22%15 benchmarksVerified | 54.5 | 15 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| CodingRank #26 of 148Percentile 83rdWeight 20%8 benchmarksVerified | 57.1 | 8 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| ReasoningWeight 17%1 benchmarkVerified | Score pending | 1 benchmark | Verified | |||
| MultimodalRank Not rankedWeight 12%1 benchmarkVerified | 88.3 | 1 benchmark | Verified | |||
| KnowledgeRank #39 of 180Percentile 79thWeight 12%4 benchmarksVerified | 63.6 | 4 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| MathWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified | Score pending | 1 benchmark | Verified |
30 of 670 tracked benchmark slots have displayable evidence · bars run 0–100
Coverage detailsHow 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.
- Agentic15/15 verified
- Coding8/8 verified
- Reasoning1/1 verified
- Multimodal1/1 verified
- Knowledge4/4 verified
- MultilingualNot measured
- Inst. FollowingNot measured
- Math1/1 verified
Capability shape
Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.
Hy4 preview category percentile values
- Agentic70th percentile
- Coding83rd percentile
- ReasoningNot eligible
- MultimodalNot eligible
- Knowledge79th percentile
- MultilingualNot eligible
- Instruction followingNot eligible
- MathNot eligible
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Eligible category ranks
- Agentic#37/123
- Coding#26/148
- ReasoningNot ranked
- MultimodalNot ranked
- Knowledge#39/180
- MultilingualNot ranked
- Inst. FollowingNot ranked
- MathNot ranked
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.
Coding8 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Pro | Score65.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 89.9% | Gap24.2 behind | Weight26% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| DeepSWE | Score64.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Wonder Full · 79.0% | Gap14.7 behind | Weight15% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| SWE Multilingual | Score82.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 93.9% | Gap11 behind | Weight5% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 | Score85.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: SWE-2 · 92.8% | Gap7.4 behind | WeightScored in Agentic | Provider exact |
| NL2Repo | Score58.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash · 65.4% | Gap6.5 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| ProgramBenchProgramBench: Can Language Models Rebuild Programs From Scratch? | Score17.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 93.0% | Gap75.5 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| PostTrain Bench | Score35.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GLM-5.3 · 39.8% | Gap4.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| sweMarathon | Score31.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Step 5 Preview · 72.7% | Gap40.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Agentic15 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 | Score85.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: SWE-2 · 92.8% | Gap7.4 behind | Weight8% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| JobBench | Score61.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Wonder Full · 75.3% | Gap13.6 behind | Weight5% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| AutomationBench | Score32.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash · 54.8% | Gap22.7 behind | Weight5% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| MCP Atlas | Score83.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Spark 1.1 · 88.1% | Gap4.4 behind | Weight4% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Terminal-Bench 2.1, Vals AI run | Score55.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 87.3% | Gap32.2 behind | Weight3% ref. weight | |
| Toolathlon-Verified | Score74.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 80.6% | Gap6.5 behind | Weight3% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| Agents' Last Exam | Score22.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 59.3% | Gap36.5 behind | Weight3% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| HLE w/ toolsHumanity's Last Exam with tools | Score55.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 67.7% | Gap12.3 behind | Weight3% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| CyberGym | Score78.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: MiMo-V2.6-Flash · 95.1% | Gap16.7 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| WideResearch | Score83.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Hy4 preview · 83.9% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| DRACOData Research and Analysis with Complex Operations | Score77.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 88.6% | Gap11.4 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| APEX-Agents | Score37.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Grok 4.6 · 57.5% | Gap20.4 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| skillsBench | Score62.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 70.2% | Gap7.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| BankerToolBench | Score78.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Hy4 preview · 78.6% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| CWE-bench v1 | Score53.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 68.0% | Gap15 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
Reasoning1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CritPtCritical Physics Tasks | Score16.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Wonder Full · 32.9% | Gap16 behind | WeightFeeds overall | Provider exact |
Multimodal1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OfficeQA Pro | Score66.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 67.7% | Gap1.5 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
Knowledge4 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HLEHumanity's Last Exam | Score55.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 65% | Gap9.6 behind | Weight44% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| HLE w/o toolsHumanity's Last Exam without tools | Score43.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 64.4% | Gap21 behind | Weight7% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A | Score92.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96% | Gap3.7 behind | Weight3% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| GPQA-DGPQA Diamond | Score92.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96.0% | Gap3.7 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Math1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apex | Score74.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Hy4 preview · 74.2% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Bars run 0–100; the dark tick marks the best source-verified value
All 30 rowsLineage
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.
preview · Preview
Hy4 preview release history
Radar confirmed these at the source. Use Hy4 preview in your work? Explore Radar to follow supported changes and choose your alerts.
Radar
Spec sheet
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
- API model ID
- tencent/Hy4-previewTencent Hy4 preview model card
- Context window
- 1MTencent Hy4 preview model card
- 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 publishes the BF16 Hy4 preview checkpoint and a separate FP8 quantization under Apache 2.0. The official deployment recipes use the self-hosted hy4-preview model ID with vLLM or SGLang; no first-party hosted token rate is published for this exact checkpoint.
- Cloud regions
- Not tracked yet
- Lifecycle
- Current
- API capabilities
- Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
- Prompt caching
- Not documented in the pricing recordTencent Hy4 preview model card
- Self-host
- Open weights available; hardware estimate not sourced
- 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.
Hy4 preview ranks #48 of 220 on the public leaderboard with a score of 60.86/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.
Hy4 preview is a open weight model with a 1M context window. It uses an explicit reasoning mode, which can improve complex problem solving while adding latency and token use.
Tencent publishes the BF16 Hy4 preview checkpoint and a separate FP8 quantization under Apache 2.0. The official deployment recipes use the self-hosted hy4-preview model ID with vLLM or SGLang; no first-party hosted token rate is published for this exact checkpoint.
Its explicit predecessor is Hy3. 30 of 670 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Coding at #26, while its lowest eligible position is Knowledge at #39. particularly well-suited for software development and code generation tasks.
Last updated October 13, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Deployment options
Self-host and provider-specific paths stay separate from benchmark evidence so operating constraints are visible before a score becomes the whole decision.
Published weights are available, but BenchLM does not yet have a sourced parameter and VRAM profile for this exact model. Hardware cost estimates stay unavailable until that sizing record is complete.
Estimate VRAM from known parametersQuestions
How does Hy4 preview perform overall in AI benchmarks?
Hy4 preview ranks #48 out of 220 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 60.86/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 30 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Is Hy4 preview good for knowledge and understanding?
Hy4 preview ranks #39 out of 180 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 63.6/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Hy4 preview good for coding and programming?
Hy4 preview ranks #26 out of 148 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 57.1/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Hy4 preview good for mathematics?
Hy4 preview has source-displayable benchmark coverage for mathematics, 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 preview good for reasoning and logic?
Hy4 preview has source-displayable benchmark coverage for reasoning and logic, 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 preview good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
Hy4 preview ranks #37 out of 123 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 54.5/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Hy4 preview good for multimodal and grounded tasks?
Hy4 preview 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.
Is Hy4 preview open source?
Hy4 preview is an open-weight model from Tencent. Its weights can be downloaded for local or hosted deployment, subject to the published license. Open weight does not automatically mean open source: training data and training code may remain private, and commercial restrictions can still apply.
Does Hy4 preview have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
No. Hy4 preview currently has 31 source-displayable rows across 670 tracked benchmark slots. 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 preview?
Hy4 preview 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.