HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
openai
SWELancer-Benchmark
Science & Engineering2025–2025
openai / SWELancer-Benchmark · Archived

SWELancer-Benchmark

This repo contains the dataset and code for the paper "SWE-Lancer: Can Frontier LLMs Earn $1 Million from Real-World Freelance Software Engineering?"

4Distinct people
5Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
1.4KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

This repo contains the dataset and code for the paper "SWE-Lancer: Can Frontier LLMs Earn $1 Million from Real-World Freelance Software Engineering?"

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 8–Nov 15 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/15/2026, 10:49:33 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by day5 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2025-02-19 06:38:29 UTC to 2025-02-27 20:18:51 UTC.

01232025-02-19 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-02-20 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 0 submissions, 3 commentsFeb 192025-02-20 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-02-21 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2025-02-21 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-02-22 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-02-22 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-02-23 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-02-23 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-02-24 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsFeb 232025-02-24 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-02-25 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-02-25 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-02-26 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-02-26 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-02-27 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-02-27 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-02-28 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsFeb 27

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Feb 192025-02-19 00:00:00 UTC2025-02-20 00:00:00 UTC303
Feb 202025-02-20 00:00:00 UTC2025-02-21 00:00:00 UTC101
Feb 212025-02-21 00:00:00 UTC2025-02-22 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 222025-02-22 00:00:00 UTC2025-02-23 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 232025-02-23 00:00:00 UTC2025-02-24 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 242025-02-24 00:00:00 UTC2025-02-25 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 252025-02-25 00:00:00 UTC2025-02-26 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 262025-02-26 00:00:00 UTC2025-02-27 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 272025-02-27 00:00:00 UTC2025-02-28 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

1 sources
Considering both this blog post and the livestream demos, I am underwhelmed. Having just finished the stream, I had a real "was that all" moment, which on one hand shows how spoiled I've gotten by new models impressing me, but on another feels like OpenAI really struggles to stay ahead of their competitors. What has been shown feels like it could be achieved using a custom system prompt on older versions of OpenAIs models, and I struggle to see anything here that truly required ground-up training on such a massive scale. Hearing that they were forced to spread their training across multiple data centers simultaneously, coupled with their recent release of SWE-Lancer [0] which showed Anthropic (Claude 3.5 Sonnet (new) to be exact) handily beating them, I was really expecting something more than "slightly more casual/shorter output", which
Read the rest
again, I fail to see how that wasn't possible by prompting GPT-4o. Looking at pricing [1], I am frankly astonished. > Input: $75.00 / 1M tokens > Cached input: $37.50 / 1M tokens > Output: $150.00 / 1M tokens How could they justify that asking price? And, if they have some amazing capabilities that make a 30-fold pricing increase justifiable, why not show it? Like, OpenAI are many things, but I always felt they understood price vs performance incredibly well, from the start with gpt-3.5-turbo up to now with o3-mini, so this really baffles me. If GPT-4.5 can justify such immense cost in certain tasks, why hide that and if not, why release this at all? [0] https://github.com/openai/SWELancer-Benchmark [1] https://openai.com/api/pricing/
In GPT-4.5

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.