SemiAnalysis launches GDPx, an agentic benchmark across 11 high-value domains where top model Claude Opus 5.5 scores just 12%
READ THE ORIGINAL SOURCEOpen original sourcegdpx.semianalysis.com · Opens in a new tabSemiAnalysis presents GDPx, a v1.0 agentic benchmark measuring frontier model capabilities across 11 high-value domains, including chip design, cybersecurity, biology, finance, legal, quant trading, materials science, and alignment. The page lists 206 tasks built with 14 specialized data partners. It shows a cost-versus-performance Pareto frontier and per-domain comparisons across 20 models. The top GDPx score shown is 12.0 for Claude Opus 5.5, with Gemini 4 Carbon at 10.9 and GPT-6 Astra at 9.6.
⚑ Publication date unconfirmed · what to check
We could not confirm when the original page was published. The time shown here may be when we discovered it.
Claim context: the page does not document scoring methodology or task-level details in the supplied text.
One primary source; other links are context, not independent corroboration.
- Primary sourceX discovery · source check open
- Discovery linkX
Grok Bot submitted this discovery. We could not confirm when the original page was published. The time shown here may be when we discovered it. The original source and submitted evidence remain inspectable; no editor has verified the claim.
Open full article view →- Linked article+30
- Fetched source page+30
- No editor link review+0
- Original non-discussion link+5
- Publication date unconfirmed-8
This measures the stored source trail and editorial steps. It does not certify accuracy, peer review, or independent corroboration. Popularity adds no points.
View full scoring →Read the scoring rubric →What the source says
SemiAnalysis presents GDPx, a v1.0 agentic benchmark measuring frontier model capabilities across 11 high-value domains, including chip design, cybersecurity, biology, finance, legal, quant trading, materials science, and alignment. The page lists 206 tasks built with 14 specialized data partners. It shows a cost-versus-performance Pareto frontier and per-domain comparisons across 20 models. The top GDPx score shown is 12.0 for Claude Opus 5.5, with Gemini 4 Carbon at 10.9 and GPT-6 Astra at 9.6.
A READER'S EVIDENCE CHECKHow to read this signalSix questions about claims, sources, risks, and open checks
This is a signal-level guide until claim-level evidence is available. “Not recorded” means the evidence has not been assessed here; it does not mean a result is false. How we check AI news →
- 01Who is making each claim?
The claimant and whether each claim was measured or asserted are not recorded in this public brief.
- 02What was actually tested?
Not recorded per claim. Check the source for sample size, tasks, model and benchmark versions, and reproducibility.
- 03Where are the sources?
Original link: gdpx.semianalysis.com. Brief basis: fetched source page. Primary page date and quote locations are not established in this panel.
- 04What could mislead?
We could not confirm when the original page was published. The time shown here may be when we discovered it.
- 05What is at risk if wrong?
Not assessed per claim. Consider safety, privacy, cost, and adoption decisions before relying on the result.
- 06What would change the view?
No claim-specific check is recorded. An inspectable primary method or independent replication could change the assessment.
Key findings from the stored brief
- GDPx v1.0 spans 11 domains and 206 tasks, built with 14 specialized data partners.
- The page plots GDPx score against average cost per task for 20 models on a Pareto frontier.
- Claude Opus 5.5 is shown with the highest GDPx score at 12.0 percent.
- Several models are listed with scores from 2.7 to 10.9, and Muse Wonder Full has no public price.
Source claims not independently checked; the page does not document scoring methodology or task-level details in the supplied text.
This is a source-based abstract, not independent validation of the source's claims.
Evidence & sources
These links show where the signal came from and what the source page linked to. A linked page is context, not independent corroboration.
Related archive coverage
These relationships record a citation or topic overlap, not confirmation of the finding.
Grok Bot submitted this discovery. We could not confirm when the original page was published. The time shown here may be when we discovered it. The original source and submitted evidence remain inspectable; no editor has verified the claim.
These are Grok Bot discovery notes. AINewsIQ prepared a brief from available source material. The bot's rationale, linked posts, authors, and stances have not been independently verified.
GDPx v1.0 has 206 tasks from 14 data partners in chip design, cyber, bio, finance, legal, quant trading, RSI and more. Opus 5.5 leads at 12.0, then Gemini 4 Carbon 10.9 and GPT-6 Astra 9.6. SemiAnalysis's launch post drew 2.1K likes and 893K views; Ethan Mollick welcomed it but wants human baselines.
Source claims not independently checked; the page does not document scoring methodology or task-level details in the supplied text.
Engagement counts, when shown, are observed snapshots. They do not establish accuracy or corroboration.
- x post ↗ · 2,109 likes, 205 reposts, 222 replies, 254 quotes · observed 11/2/2026, 11:03:13 AM
- x post ↗ · 157 likes, 6 reposts, 144 replies, 9 quotes · observed 11/2/2026, 11:03:13 AM
- bluesky post ↗ · 6 likes, 0 reposts, 1 replies, 0 quotes · observed 11/2/2026, 10:58:25 AM
Timeline & updates
- Signal dated by source or discovery feed
This timestamp places the signal in the radar. It may be the discovery post date rather than the primary page's first publication date.
- Shared brief stored
AINewsIQ prepared one abstract from fetched source page.
A publication revision history is not stored for this signal. New engagement snapshots do not mean the source itself changed.
Why this may matter
A benchmark spanning high-value professional domains with cost-performance tradeoffs can help readers compare frontier models on agentic work beyond standard coding or QA tests.
Limits and open questions
Source claims not independently checked; the page does not document scoring methodology or task-level details in the supplied text.
Organization-specific financial, security, and operational effects require the organization's own context and review.
Discussion
Comments are reviewed before publication. Discuss the evidence, not the person.
No published comments yet.
Reader discussion opens with accounts. You can read the original source and published comments now.