Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-5.2-Codex
Claude Opus 4.8 
GPT-5.2-Codex Verdict
- Claude Opus 4.8 leads on quality: 64.8 vs 60.8.
- Claude Opus 4.8 is stronger in agents & tools, coding, composite, human preference, knowledge, 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 4.8 streams 2.2× faster (56 vs 25 tokens per second).
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.8 | GPT-5.2-Codex |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 64.8 | 60.8 |
| Agents & tools score | 65.0 | 63.5 |
| Coding score | 65.6 | 55.7 |
| Composite score | 82.1 | 56.8 |
| Human preference score | 65.8 | – |
| Instruction following score | 61.8 | 75.1 |
| Knowledge score | 66.5 | 63.1 |
| Long context score | 65.4 | 67.8 |
| Multimodal score | 64.5 | 60.7 |
| Reasoning score | 64.6 | – |
| Blended price $/M | $10.00 | $4.81 |
| Output speed | 56 tok/s | 25 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 29.3 s | 6.7 s |
| Context window | 1M | 400k |
| Terminal-Bench | – | 66.5% |
| SimpleBench | 64.8% | – |
| Remote Labor Index | 8.3% | – |
| APEX-Agents | – | 27.6% |
| FrontierCode | 46.5% | – |
| GSO-Bench | 47.1% | – |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 158.3 | – |
| LMArena Text | 1473 | – |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1503 | – |
| LMArena Coding | 1527 | – |
| LMArena WebDev | 1540 | 1339 |
| LMArena Vision | 1289 | – |
| 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 | 42.0 | 28.5 |
| IFBench | 62.2% | 77.6% |
| AA-LCR | 77.7% | 82.3% |
| MMMU-Pro | – | 76.3% |
| AA-Omniscience | 28.8 | -2.2 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 58.3% | 37.1% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 92.0% | 89.9% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 48.7% | 35.7% |
| SciCode (AA) | 54.4% | – |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 94.4% | 92.1% |
| LiveCodeBench | 87.8% | 88.0% |
| MMLU-Pro | 89.6% | – |
| LegalBench | 83.6% | – |
| CorpFin | 66.7% | – |
| TaxEval | 75.6% | – |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | 71.9% | – |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | 88.6% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | 92.4% | – |
| Vals Index | 60.9 | – |
| SWE-Bench Pro | – | 41.0% |
| HiL-Bench | 35.3% | – |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1281 | – |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | – | 72.8% |
| SWE-bench Verified (any scaffold) | – | 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 4.8 vs GPT-5.2-Codex: questions
- Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than GPT-5.2-Codex?
- Claude Opus 4.8 leads on quality: 64.8 vs 60.8. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Opus 4.8 is ahead overall as of 2026-09-10, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than GPT-5.2-Codex for coding?
- Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher in coding (66 vs 56 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than GPT-5.2-Codex for agentic tasks?
- Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher in agentic tasks (65 vs 64 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 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 4.8 or GPT-5.2-Codex?
- Claude Opus 4.8 streams faster: 56 against 25 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Claude Opus 4.8 accepts more context: 1M against 400k tokens.