Short answer: Only mathematicians born between 1450 and 1850 have scholarly IQ estimates, all from Catharine Cox's 1926 study. Her corrected figures rank Gottfried Leibniz highest at 205, then Blaise Pascal at 195 and Isaac Newton and Pierre-Simon Laplace at 190. Gauss, Euler, Archimedes, Pythagoras, Ramanujan, Gödel, von Neumann, Turing, Nash and Simons have no scholarly estimate; online numbers for them are unsourced.
At a glance
| Highest scholarly estimate | Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, 205 (Cox 1926, corrected) |
|---|---|
| Source of every scholarly estimate here | Catharine Cox, Early Mental Traits of Three Hundred Geniuses (1926) |
| Cox's birth-year window | 1450–1850 |
| Great mathematicians missing from Cox | Gauss, Euler, Fermat and the Bernoullis |
| Most-quoted unsourced figure | Gauss, 250–300 |
| Published measured scores in this group | None |
| Talent rating on record | G. H. Hardy's 0–100 scale: Ramanujan 100, Hilbert 80 |
The ranking: scholarly estimates first
The table lists every major mathematician with a scholarly IQ estimate, highest first, followed by the celebrated figures who have none. Cox's numbers are her corrected estimates based on records from ages 17 to 26. Where no scholar has published a figure, the table says so rather than borrowing one from a list site.
| Name | Estimate | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716) | 205 | Cox (1926), corrected estimate for ages 17–26 |
| Blaise Pascal (1623–1662) | 195 | Cox (1926), corrected; 180 before correction |
| Isaac Newton (1642–1727) | 190 | Cox (1926), corrected; 170 before correction |
| Pierre-Simon Laplace (1749–1827) | 190 | Cox (1926), corrected |
| Joseph-Louis Lagrange (1736–1813) | 185 | Cox (1926), corrected |
| Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) | 185 | Cox (1926), corrected |
| René Descartes (1596–1650) | 180 | Cox (1926), corrected; 160 before correction |
| Carl Friedrich Gauss (1777–1855) | No scholarly estimate | Not among Cox's 301; the 250–300 online figure is unsourced |
| Leonhard Euler (1707–1783) | No scholarly estimate | Not among Cox's 301; online figures of 180–210 are unsourced |
| Archimedes (c. 287–212 BC) | No scholarly estimate | Predates Cox's range; no record of his youth survives |
| Pythagoras (c. 570–c. 490 BC) | No scholarly estimate | Wrote nothing; known only from much later sources |
| Srinivasa Ramanujan (1887–1920) | No scholarly estimate | Born after Cox's range; Hardy rated his talent 100 of 100, which is not an IQ |
| John von Neumann (1903–1957) | No scholarly estimate | Born after Cox's range; no published test result |
| Kurt Gödel (1906–1978) | No scholarly estimate | Born after Cox's range; no published test result |
| Alan Turing (1912–1954) | No scholarly estimate | Born after Cox's range; no published test result |
| John Nash (1928–2015) | No scholarly estimate | Born after Cox's range; no published test result |
| Jim Simons (1938–2024) | No scholarly estimate | Born after Cox's range; no score ever disclosed |
Where the scholarly numbers come from
Every estimate at the top of the table traces to one book: Catharine Cox's Early Mental Traits of Three Hundred Geniuses, volume II of Lewis Terman's Genetic Studies of Genius (Stanford University Press, 1926). Cox began with the upper half of James McKeen Cattell's list of 1,000 eminent people and kept only those born between 1450 and 1850, whose fame was achieved rather than inherited and whose early lives were documented in detail. That left 301 subjects. Raters read compiled biographical records and assigned IQs on the model of the Stanford–Binet: one estimate for childhood to age 17 (A1) and one for ages 17 to 26 (A2). Cox then corrected the figures for the reliability of the data, raising them most where records were thinnest.
Three cautions apply. The raters knew how each life turned out. The numbers follow the ratio logic of the 1916 Stanford–Binet, not modern deviation scoring. And analysts who adjust them for the Flynn effect arrive at much lower figures: one widely used table cuts Newton's 190 to 168. Treat Cox's work as informed historical judgment, not measurement. The full method is set out in historical IQ estimates explained.
Why Gauss, Euler and the ancients are missing
Cox's window explains most absences. Archimedes and Pythagoras lived roughly two millennia too early. Ramanujan, von Neumann, Gödel, Turing, Nash and Simons were born after 1850. The surprise lies inside the window: Leonhard Euler, born in 1707, and Carl Friedrich Gauss, born in 1777, are not among the 301, and neither is Pierre de Fermat or any of the Bernoullis. The consequence is stark. Two of the most celebrated mathematicians of the modern era have no scholarly IQ estimate of any kind, which is why their pages on this site report none.
The unsourced numbers, checked
The internet fills the gap with numbers that have no rater, no method and no citation.
- Gauss, 250–300: printed by Parade in 2022 without a source. On a scale with standard deviation 15, 250 sits 10 standard deviations above the mean, a rarity of about one in 1.3 × 10²³.
- Euler, 180–200 or 195–210: two popular lists disagree by as much as 30 points, and neither cites anything.
- Ramanujan, 185: Reader's Digest says he "reportedly" had it and names no source. An IQ of 185 would be about one in 137 million.
Two checks expose most such claims. First, modern adult tests cannot produce them: the WAIS-IV full-scale range ends at 160. Second, a real estimate names who made it and how. None of these do. For the limits of the scale itself, see how IQ scores are classified.
Better evidence than a number
For mathematicians without an estimate, the record is the measure. Dated achievements say more than any invented score.
- Archimedes: bounded π between 223/71 and 22/7 using 96-sided polygons.
- Euler: 866 catalogued works, about half of them produced after 1766, when he was nearly or fully blind.
- Gauss: proved the regular 17-gon constructible on 30 March 1796, a month before turning 19.
- Ramanujan: nearly 3,900 results, many proved by others only after his death in 1920.
- Von Neumann: the minimax theorem (1928) and Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (1932).
- Gödel: the incompleteness theorems, published in 1931 when he was 25.
- Turing: "On Computable Numbers" (1936), a founding text of computer science.
- Nash: a 28-page 1950 thesis on non-cooperative games, later recognized with the 1994 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences; the Abel Prize followed in 2015.
- Simons: the Chern–Simons form, developed with Shiing-Shen Chern, and the 1976 Oswald Veblen Prize in geometry, before he founded Renaissance Technologies.
A mathematician's own ranking
The one ranking made from the inside is not an IQ list at all. G. H. Hardy, as relayed by Paul Erdős and put in print by Bruce C. Berndt, rated mathematicians for natural talent on a scale of 0 to 100. He gave himself 25, J. E. Littlewood 30, David Hilbert 80 and Srinivasa Ramanujan 100. The scale has no norms and no test behind it, but it records how one of the leading analysts of the 20th century judged his peers. The context is on the Ramanujan IQ page.
How to read any genius IQ list
Four questions sort real estimates from noise. Who made the estimate, and where was it published? What was rated: a test, or biographical records? On what scale, and with what standard deviation? Does the number exceed what any modern test can report? A figure that fails the first question usually fails the rest.
Readers who want a score of their own should start with a supervised test. Our free IQ test is a practice screener, not a clinical measure, and this guide to online test accuracy explains why results vary. For the achievements behind these names, see the greatest mathematicians ever, and for scientists, the companion physicists' IQ ranking.
Frequently asked questions
Which mathematician had the highest IQ?
Among scholarly estimates, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz ranks highest, at 205 in Catharine Cox's corrected 1926 figures, followed by Blaise Pascal at 195. Mathematicians outside Cox's 1450–1850 window, or left out of it, such as Gauss, Euler and Ramanujan, have no scholarly estimate, so no honest overall winner can be named.
What was Isaac Newton's IQ?
Newton never took an IQ test. Catharine Cox's 1926 study rated his record from ages 17 to 26 at 170, then corrected the figure upward to 190 to account for incomplete data. It is a retrospective judgment by raters who knew his later achievements, not a measured score.
Did Gauss have an IQ of 250?
No evidence supports it. Gauss never took an IQ test and does not appear in Cox's 1926 study. The 250–300 range circulates without a source, and 250 lies 10 standard deviations above the mean on a modern scale, beyond what any standard test can measure.
Why don't Euler and Gauss have Cox estimates?
Both were born inside Cox's 1450–1850 window, but neither is among her 301 subjects. Cox started from the most eminent half of James McKeen Cattell's list of 1,000 notable people and required detailed records of childhood and youth. Whatever the reason for their absence, no scholarly estimate exists for either.
Is Hardy's 0–100 scale an IQ score?
No. It was G. H. Hardy's informal rating of natural mathematical talent, passed on by Paul Erdős and published by Bruce C. Berndt. Hardy gave himself 25, Littlewood 30, Hilbert 80 and Ramanujan 100. It carries the authority of a great mathematician's judgment but has no norms, test items or statistical scale.
Sources
- Cox, C. M. (1926). Genetic Studies of Genius, Vol. II: The Early Mental Traits of Three Hundred Geniuses — Internet Archive — The original study behind every scholarly estimate in the table
- Cox's IQ Estimates of 301 Eminent Geniuses — IQ Comparison Site — Corrected Cox figures (Leibniz 205, Pascal 195, Newton 190, Laplace 190, Lagrange 185, Galileo 185, Descartes 180); Flynn-adjusted values; absence of Gauss, Euler, Fermat, Bernoulli
- Simonton, D. K. (2020). Galton, Terman, Cox: The Distinctive Volume II in Genetic Studies of Genius. Gifted Child Quarterly — Cox's selection criteria, two age-based estimates and reliability corrections
- Srinivasa Ramanujan — K. Srinivasa Rao, Institute of Mathematical Sciences, Chennai — Berndt's account of Hardy's 0–100 talent ratings
- Who Has the Highest IQ in the World? — Parade — Unsourced Gauss (250–300) and Euler (180–200) figures
- 50 People with the Highest IQ Scores — Reader's Digest — Unsourced Ramanujan (185) figure
- John von Neumann — Wikipedia — Dates and major works
- John Forbes Nash Jr. — Wikipedia — 1950 thesis, 1994 Nobel Memorial Prize, 2015 Abel Prize
- Jim Simons — Wikipedia — Chern–Simons form, 1976 Veblen Prize, Renaissance Technologies
- Alan Turing — Wikipedia — Dates and 'On Computable Numbers' (1936)
Editorial standard: IQ figures for historical figures are retrospective estimates and are labeled as such; scores for living people appear only when the person disclosed them or a reputable outlet reported them. Corrections: contact the editors.