Skip to main content

Model profile

MAI-Thinking-1

MicrosoftCurrentReleased Jun 2, 2026
Data verified
Overall Score
Unranked
Arena Elo
Not listed
Eligible category ranks
4of 8
Price (1M tokens)
Not listedAPI pricing
Speed
Not listed
Context
256K

Evidence coverage

13 of 323 tracked benchmarks are published. 13 are verified and 0 provisional. 6 of 8 categories are measured.

Updated July 23, 2026Methodology
Published / tracked
13 / 323
Verified
13
Provisional
0
Categories with evidence
6 / 8

Evidence by category

  • Agentic1 benchmark
    Verified
  • Coding3 benchmarks
    Verified
  • Reasoning1 benchmark
    Verified
  • Knowledge4 benchmarks
    Verified
  • Math3 benchmarks
    Verified
  • Multilingual0 benchmarks
    Not measured
  • Multimodal0 benchmarks
    Not measured
  • Inst. Following1 benchmark
    Verified
ProprietaryReasoning
Confidence:
High
1

BenchLM is tracking MAI-Thinking-1, but this profile is currently excluded from the public leaderboard because it still lacks enough non-generated benchmark coverage to rank safely. Only non-generated public benchmark rows appear below.

MAI-Thinking-1 is a proprietary model with a 256K token context window. It uses explicit chain-of-thought reasoning, which typically improves performance on math and complex reasoning tasks at the cost of higher latency and token usage.

This profile currently has 13 of 323 tracked benchmarks. BenchLM only exposes non-generated benchmark rows publicly, so missing categories stay blank until a sourced evaluation is available.

Its strongest category is Instruction Following (#1), while its weakest is Coding (#52). This performance profile makes it a well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.

Peer position

Exact provisional scores and ranks for the closest listed peers. A score can appear before a model clears the evidence threshold for a rank, so equal scores can have different rank states.

Range 77.4483.93

  1. Claude Mythos 5
    Anthropic
    #183.93
    Claude Mythos 5 is #1 with a score of 83.93.
    Compare
  2. Claude Fable 5
    Anthropic
    #283.68
    Claude Fable 5 is #2 with a score of 83.68.
    Compare
  3. GPT-5.6 Sol
    OpenAI
    #381.96
    GPT-5.6 Sol is #3 with a score of 81.96.
    Compare
  4. Kimi K3
    Moonshot AI
    #480.96
    Kimi K3 is #4 with a score of 80.96.
    Compare
  5. Claude Opus 4.8
    Anthropic
    #578.34
    Claude Opus 4.8 is #5 with a score of 78.34.
    Compare
  6. Muse Spark 1.1
    Meta
    #677.44
    Muse Spark 1.1 is #6 with a score of 77.44.
    Compare
  7. MAI-Thinking-1Current model
    Microsoft
    UnrankedNot measured
    MAI-Thinking-1 is Unranked with a score of Not measured.

Category percentile

More

Relative position among models eligible for each sourced category. A higher percentile means a stronger position within that category's ranked cohort; 100 is highest.

  1. Inst. Following100%
    Eligible cohort rank #1 of 31Category score 97.8
  2. Knowledge45%
    Eligible cohort rank #29 of 52Category score 69.7
  3. Agentic63%
    Eligible cohort rank #45 of 119Category score 50.6
  4. Coding58%
    Eligible cohort rank #52 of 122Category score 51.9

Category evidence

Scores and ranks appear only where this model has published benchmark evidence. Categories without displayable source records remain not measured.

Category scores, ranks, weighting, benchmark coverage, and evidence status
CategoryScore
AgenticRank #45 of 119Percentile 63rdWeight 22%1 benchmarkVerified50.6
CodingRank #52 of 122Percentile 58thWeight 20%3 benchmarksVerified51.9
ReasoningWeight 17%1 benchmarkVerifiedScore pending
KnowledgeRank #29 of 52Percentile 45thWeight 12%4 benchmarksVerified69.7
MathRank Not rankedWeight 5%3 benchmarksVerified73.7
MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measuredNot measured
MultimodalWeight 12%0 benchmarksNot measuredNot measured
Inst. FollowingRank #1 of 31Percentile 100thWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified97.8

Benchmark Details

Rows below have a displayable published verification record. Each source link and provenance note remains in the page HTML while its category is closed. Source-unverified manual rows and generated rows stay hidden.

Agentic1 benchmark
Terminal-Bench 2.0Provider exact
46%Weighted 38%
Source: Microsoft AI: MAI-Thinking-1 technical reportProvenance: Microsoft reports Terminal-Bench 2.0 at 46.0.
Coding3 benchmarks
SWE-bench VerifiedProvider exact

Software Engineering Benchmark Verified

73.5%Weighted 16%
Source: Microsoft AI: MAI-Thinking-1 technical reportProvenance: Provider exact
SWE-bench ProProvider exact
52.8%Weighted 10%
Source: Microsoft AI: MAI-Thinking-1 technical reportProvenance: Provider exact
Terminal-Bench 2.0Provider exact
46.0%Display only
Source: Microsoft AI: MAI-Thinking-1 technical reportProvenance: Microsoft reports Terminal-Bench 2.0 at 46.0. BenchLM stores it in both coding and agentic views.
Reasoning1 benchmark
Graphwalks BFS 128KProvider exact

Graphwalks BFS 0K-128K

90%Display only
Source: Microsoft AI: MAI-Thinking-1 technical reportProvenance: Microsoft reports GraphWalks at 90.0 in the MAI-Thinking-1 comparison table. BenchLM stores it on the existing GraphWalks BFS 128K display key.
Knowledge4 benchmarks
MMLU-ProProvider exact

Massive Multitask Language Understanding Professional

85%Weighted 30%
Source: Microsoft AI: MAI-Thinking-1 technical reportProvenance: Provider exact
SimpleQAProvider exact

Measuring Short-Form Factuality in Large Language Models

31%Weighted 11%
Source: Microsoft AI: MAI-Thinking-1 technical reportProvenance: Provider exact
GPQAProvider exact

Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A

84.2%Weighted 7%
Source: Microsoft AI: MAI-Thinking-1 technical reportProvenance: Microsoft reports GPQA Diamond at 84.2. BenchLM stores that exact value on the weighted GPQA lane and the display GPQA-Diamond lane.
GPQA-DProvider exact

GPQA Diamond

84.2%Display only
Source: Microsoft AI: MAI-Thinking-1 technical reportProvenance: Microsoft reports GPQA Diamond at 84.2.
Math3 benchmarks
AIME26Provider exact

AIME 2026

94.5%Weighted 25%
Source: Microsoft AI: MAI-Thinking-1 technical reportProvenance: Provider exact
HMMT Feb 2026Provider exact

Harvard-MIT Mathematics Tournament February 2026

84.9%Weighted 25%
Source: Microsoft AI: MAI-Thinking-1 technical reportProvenance: Provider exact
AIME 2025Provider exact

American Invitational Mathematics Examination 2025

97%Display only
Source: Microsoft AI: MAI-Thinking-1 technical reportProvenance: Provider exact
Inst. Following1 benchmark
IFBenchProvider exact

Instruction Following Benchmark

85%Weighted 65%
Source: Microsoft AI: MAI-Thinking-1 technical reportProvenance: Provider exact

Frequently Asked Questions

How does MAI-Thinking-1 perform overall in AI benchmarks?

MAI-Thinking-1 has 13 published benchmark scores on BenchLM, but it does not yet have enough non-generated coverage to receive a global overall rank.

Is MAI-Thinking-1 good for knowledge and understanding?

MAI-Thinking-1 ranks #29 out of 52 models in knowledge and understanding benchmarks with an average score of 69.7. There are stronger options in this category.

Is MAI-Thinking-1 good for coding and programming?

MAI-Thinking-1 ranks #52 out of 122 models in coding and programming benchmarks with an average score of 51.9. There are stronger options in this category.

Is MAI-Thinking-1 good for mathematics?

MAI-Thinking-1 has visible benchmark coverage in mathematics, but BenchLM does not currently assign it a global category rank there.

Is MAI-Thinking-1 good for reasoning and logic?

MAI-Thinking-1 has visible benchmark coverage in reasoning and logic, but BenchLM does not currently assign it a global category rank there.

Is MAI-Thinking-1 good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?

MAI-Thinking-1 ranks #45 out of 119 models in agentic tool use and computer tasks benchmarks with an average score of 50.6. There are stronger options in this category.

Is MAI-Thinking-1 good for instruction following?

MAI-Thinking-1 ranks #1 out of 31 models in instruction following benchmarks with an average score of 97.8. It is among the top performers in this category.

Does MAI-Thinking-1 have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?

Not yet. MAI-Thinking-1 currently has 13 published benchmark scores out of the 323 benchmarks BenchLM tracks. BenchLM only exposes non-generated public benchmark rows, so missing categories stay blank until a sourced evaluation is available.

What is the context window size of MAI-Thinking-1?

MAI-Thinking-1 has a published context window of 256K, which determines how much text it can process in a single interaction.

Last updated: July 23, 2026 · Runtime metrics stay blank until BenchLM has a sourced snapshot.

Choose with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, new releases, pricing changes, and the evidence behind them.

Free. One email per week.