Claude Opus 4.6 vs GPT-5.2-Codex
Claude Opus 4.6 
GPT-5.2-Codex Verdict
- Claude Opus 4.6 leads on quality: 63.3 vs 60.8.
- Claude Opus 4.6 is stronger in agents & tools, coding, composite, human preference, knowledge, maths, multimodal, reasoning.
- GPT-5.2-Codex is stronger in instruction following, long context.
- GPT-5.2-Codex is 2.1× cheaper ($4.81 vs $10.00 per 1M blended).
- Claude Opus 4.6 streams 1.5× faster (36 vs 25 tokens per second).
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.6 | GPT-5.2-Codex |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 63.3 | 60.8 |
| Agents & tools score | 68.8 | 63.5 |
| Coding score | 62.4 | 55.7 |
| Composite score | 69.4 | 56.8 |
| Human preference score | 64.9 | – |
| Instruction following score | 53.9 | 75.1 |
| Knowledge score | 70.6 | 63.1 |
| Long context score | 65.5 | 67.8 |
| Maths score | 65.7 | – |
| Multimodal score | 63.6 | 60.7 |
| Reasoning score | 62.6 | – |
| Blended price $/M | $10.00 | $4.81 |
| Output speed | 36 tok/s | 25 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 2.4 s | 6.7 s |
| Context window | 1M | 400k |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.5% | – |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 94.4% | – |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | 78.7% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 19.0% | – |
| Terminal-Bench | 79.8% | 66.5% |
| SimpleBench | 67.6% | – |
| Cybench | 93.0% | – |
| Remote Labor Index | 4.2% | – |
| WeirdML | 77.9% | – |
| APEX-Agents | 32.4% | 27.6% |
| FrontierCode | 26.6% | – |
| GSO-Bench | 33.3% | – |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.3 | – |
| LMArena Text | 1498 | – |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1527 | – |
| LMArena Coding | 1546 | – |
| LMArena WebDev | 1537 | 1339 |
| LMArena Vision | 1311 | – |
| LiveBench | – | 74.0% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | – | 77.7% |
| LiveBench Coding | – | 83.6% |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | – | 49.4% |
| LiveBench Mathematics | – | 88.8% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | – | 78.2% |
| LiveBench Language | – | 73.7% |
| AA Intelligence Index | 31.9 | 28.5 |
| IFBench | 53.1% | 77.6% |
| AA-LCR | 78.0% | 82.3% |
| MMMU-Pro | 75.4% | 76.3% |
| AA-Omniscience | 13.7 | -2.2 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 48.5% | 37.1% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 89.6% | 89.9% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 39.9% | 35.7% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 92.1% | 92.1% |
| LiveCodeBench | – | 88.0% |
| SWE-Bench Pro | – | 41.0% |
| HiL-Bench | 38.3% | – |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1223 | – |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 72.4% | – |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 75.6% | 72.8% |
| SWE-bench Verified (any scaffold) | 75.6% | 72.8% |
Data as of 2026-09-10. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Opus 4.6 vs GPT-5.2-Codex: questions
- Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than GPT-5.2-Codex?
- Claude Opus 4.6 leads on quality: 63.3 vs 60.8. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Opus 4.6 is ahead overall as of 2026-09-10, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than GPT-5.2-Codex for coding?
- Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in coding (62 vs 56 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than GPT-5.2-Codex for agentic tasks?
- Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in agentic tasks (69 vs 64 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.2-Codex?
- GPT-5.2-Codex is cheaper: $4.81 against $10.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.2-Codex?
- Claude Opus 4.6 streams faster: 36 against 25 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Claude Opus 4.6 accepts more context: 1M against 400k tokens.