Claude Opus 5 vs o3
Claude Opus 5 
o3 Verdict
- Claude Opus 5 leads on quality: 70.0 vs 60.4.
- Claude Opus 5 is stronger in agents & tools, coding, composite, human preference, knowledge, long context, maths, multimodal, reasoning.
- o3 is stronger in instruction following.
- o3 is 2.9× cheaper ($3.50 vs $10.00 per 1M blended).
- o3 streams 2.0× faster (101 vs 51 tokens per second).
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 | o3 |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 70.0 | 60.4 |
| Agents & tools score | 71.5 | 70.3 |
| Coding score | 74.5 | 62.0 |
| Composite score | 93.1 | 54.5 |
| Human preference score | 78.2 | 62.4 |
| Knowledge score | 70.6 | 57.9 |
| Long context score | 66.2 | 63.8 |
| Maths score | 67.1 | – |
| Multimodal score | 69.4 | 57.9 |
| Reasoning score | 71.5 | 61.6 |
| Instruction following score | – | 69.8 |
| Blended price $/M | $10.00 | $3.50 |
| Output speed | 51 tok/s | 101 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 93.0 s | 7.7 s |
| Context window | 1M | 200k |
| GPQA Diamond | 92.9% | – |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 97.8% | – |
| SimpleBench | 80.6% | – |
| WeirdML | 86.3% | – |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 162.6 | 146.9 |
| LMArena Text | – | 1431 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | – | 1441 |
| LMArena Coding | – | 1460 |
| LMArena Vision | – | 1214 |
| AA Intelligence Index | 50.7 | 20.2 |
| IFBench | – | 71.4% |
| AA-LCR | 79.3% | 74.7% |
| MMMU-Pro | 84.7% | 70.1% |
| AA-Omniscience | 37.1 | -15.6 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | – | 37.1% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 93.2% | 82.7% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 54.9% | 20.1% |
| SciCode (AA) | 56.4% | – |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | – | 80.7% |
| LiveCodeBench | 89.0% | – |
| MMLU-Pro | 91.6% | – |
| IOI | 91.7% | – |
| LegalBench | 87.0% | – |
| CorpFin | 73.2% | – |
| TaxEval | 75.1% | – |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | 84.6% | – |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | 97.0% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | 93.4% | – |
| Vals Index | 67.2 | – |
| PRBench Finance | – | 47.7% |
| PRBench Legal | – | 48.6% |
| HiL-Bench | 57.0% | – |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1385 | – |
| MMMU (validation) | – | 82.9% |
| MMMU-Pro (official) | – | 76.4% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | – | 67.6% |
| Aider Polyglot | – | 81.3% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | – | 58.4% |
| SWE-bench Verified (any scaffold) | – | 58.4% |
| BFCL Overall | – | 63.0% |
Data as of 2026-09-10. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Opus 5 vs o3: questions
- Is Claude Opus 5 better than o3?
- Claude Opus 5 leads on quality: 70.0 vs 60.4. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Opus 5 is ahead overall as of 2026-09-10, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Claude Opus 5 better than o3 for coding?
- Claude Opus 5 scores higher in coding (75 vs 62 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Claude Opus 5 better than o3 for agentic tasks?
- Claude Opus 5 scores higher in agentic tasks (72 vs 70 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5 or o3?
- o3 is cheaper: $3.50 against $10.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Claude Opus 5 or o3?
- o3 streams faster: 101 against 51 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Claude Opus 5 accepts more context: 1M against 200k tokens.