Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
CFD
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Pre-IPOs
Unlock full access to global stock IPOs
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
Promotions
AI
Gate AI
Your all-in-one conversational AI partner
Gate AI Bot
Use Gate AI directly in your social App
GateClaw
Gate Blue Lobster, ready to go
Gate for AI Agent
AI infrastructure, Gate MCP, Skills, and CLI
Gate Skills Hub
10K+ Skills
From office tasks to trading, the all-in-one skill hub makes AI even more useful.
GateRouter
Smartly choose from 40+ AI models, with 0% extra fees
First AI programmer index released: Cursor narrowly beats Codex to top with Opus 4.7
CoinWorld News reports that the artificial intelligence analysis platform has released the first comprehensive benchmark index for coding agents (coding agent index). The index integrates three test areas—code generation, terminal operations, and technical Q&A—to evaluate the real engineering performance of AI programmers. In the first round of evaluation, Cursor CLI paired with the Opus 4.7 model scored 61 points to take the top spot, beating OpenAI’s Codex (paired with GPT-5.5) and Anthropic’s Claude Code (paired with Opus 4.7) by a margin of 1 point. Using the Opus 4.7 model as well, Cursor CLI’s score was slightly higher than the official Claude Code, but the trade-off was longer average task time (7.8 minutes vs. 5.8 minutes), and higher API call costs ($1.47 vs. $1.24). The most cost-effective option is Cursor’s built-in Composer 2, at just $0.07 per task. DeepSeek V4 Pro and Kimi K2.6 follow closely, but these domestic models take noticeably longer to run.