Composer 2vsComposer 2.5
Composer 2 | Composer 2.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Benchmarks | ||
SWE-Bench MultilingualMultilingual coding — Like SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | 73.7% | 79.8% |
Next.js EvalsNext.js coding — Vercel's open eval of how well AI coding agents build and migrate real Next.js apps — measured as the share of tasks the agent completes successfully. Higher is better. | 58% | 81% |
Terminal-Bench 2.0Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | 61.7% | 69.3% |
| BenchmarksPublished by one model only | ||
SWE-Bench ProAgentic coding — Can the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | — | 54% |
DeepSWE 1.0Agentic coding — Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. Higher is better. | — | 18% |
Terminal-Bench 2.1Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | — | 73% |
threejsevalCommunity preference (Three.js) — Every model gets the same prompt — "the Eiffel Tower", "a glass fishbowl", "a robot arm picking toys into a box" — and builds a 3D scene in Three.js. Real people then see two scenes side by side, names hidden, and vote for the one they prefer. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on threejseval.com, averaged across all the prompts. It measures whether the scene looks and moves right to a human eye, not whether the code passes a test. Higher is better. | — | 1137 |
| Overview | ||
| Company | SpaceXAI | SpaceXAI |
| Release date | Mar 19 2026 | May 18 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Proprietary |
Other comparisons
Composer 2vsClaude Fable 5.1Composer 2.5vsClaude Fable 5.1Composer 2vsGPT-6 AstraComposer 2.5vsGPT-6 AstraComposer 2vsGemini 3.8 FlashComposer 2.5vsGemini 3.8 FlashComposer 2vsMuse Spark 1.3Composer 2.5vsMuse Spark 1.3Composer 2vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashComposer 2.5vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashComposer 2vsMistral Medium 3.5Composer 2.5vsMistral Medium 3.5
Frequently asked questions
Composer 2.5 leads Composer 2 on 3 of the 3 benchmarks they both report (SWE-Bench Multilingual, Next.js Evals, Terminal-Bench 2.0). Composer 2 shipped 60 days before Composer 2.5, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On SWE-Bench Multilingual, Composer 2.5 leads at 79.8% vs Composer 2 at 73.7%. On Next.js Evals, Composer 2.5 leads at 81% vs Composer 2 at 58%. On Terminal-Bench 2.0, Composer 2.5 leads at 69.3% vs Composer 2 at 61.7%.