BenchLeader
AnthropicReasoning model

Claude Opus 5

Reasoning effort

Claude Opus 5 is an Anthropic proprietary reasoning model, released 24 Jul 2026. Its best configuration (high reasoning effort) ranks #14 of 756 on the BenchLeader Index at 68.4 ±3.7, in the top 25. The ± is the point: 59 other configurations score within that range, so they and this one cannot be told apart on quality alone — price and speed are what separate them. It scores highest in composite (85) and lowest in long context (65). At $10.00 per million tokens blended it is among the most expensive ranked models. Output speed of 54 tokens per second puts it slower than most, with a first answer in 19.8 s. It has been measured at 6 reasoning-effort settings; this summary describes the best-scoring one, and the tabs above switch between them. Last measured 2 Oct 2026.

Blended price
$10.00/M
$5.00 in · $25.00 out
Output speed
54 tok/s
measured by Artificial Analysis
First answer
20 s
first token 3.10 s
Context
1M
Full answer
29 s
median, reasoning included
Cost per run
$3.61
one full Intelligence Index run
Released
24 Jul 2026
How it scores by categoryDashed line = average model (50). One step of 15 = one standard deviation.
  1. Overall index68
  2. Reasoning73
  3. Coding69
  4. Agents & tools65
  5. Maths71
  6. Knowledge77
  7. Human preference69
  8. Multimodal67
  9. Long context65
  10. Composite85

Versions

Anthropic has shipped 9 models under this name. Each is ranked on its own results; a newer version often has fewer results so far, which holds its index nearer the average until more arrive.

ModelReleasedIndexRank
Claude Opus 5.5high22 Sept 202670.1#2
Claude Opus 5highthis page24 Jul 202668.4#14
Claude Opus 4.8max28 May 202662.4#82
Claude Opus 4.716 Apr 202663.8#59
Claude Opus 4.617 Dec 202563.1#68
Claude Opus 4.5thinking24 Nov 202560.2#106
Claude Opus 4.1thinking5 Aug 202556.7#181
Claude Opus 4thinking22 May 202555.3#214
Claude 3 Opus4 Mar 202439.3#664

Reasoning-effort configurations

The same model behaves differently depending on how much it is allowed to think. Each row is one setting, scored only on the benchmarks that were run at that setting. “Not stated” collects results from publishers that did not say which setting they used; for a reasoning model that is usually its thinking mode, but we do not assume it. Pick a setting here or at the top of the page to see its price, speed and category scores.

EffortIndexRankSpeedFirst answerChat reply costCategories
low61.7#9055 tok/s2.87 s$0.0095Agents & tools 52 · Coding 52 · Composite 75 · Knowledge 75 · Long context 66 · Maths 65 · Multimodal 63 · Reasoning 72
medium65.0#4452 tok/s5.27 s$0.0095Agents & tools 60 · Coding 56 · Composite 81 · Knowledge 76 · Long context 66 · Multimodal 65 · Reasoning 86
highbest68.4#1454 tok/s20 s$0.0095Agents & tools 65 · Coding 69 · Composite 85 · Human preference 69 · Knowledge 77 · Long context 65 · Maths 71 · Multimodal 67 · Reasoning 73
xhigh67.9#2056 tok/s45 s$0.0095Agents & tools 66 · Coding 62 · Composite 86 · Knowledge 78 · Long context 66 · Multimodal 67 · Reasoning 88
max68.2#1758 tok/s68 s$0.0095Agents & tools 65 · Coding 71 · Composite 76 · Human preference 69 · Knowledge 72 · Long context 65 · Maths 71 · Multimodal 68 · Reasoning 75
not stated66.3#3367 tok/s3.10 s$0.0095Agents & tools 71 · Coding 68 · Human preference 78 · Knowledge 66 · Maths 67 · Reasoning 71

What more thinking costs

Turning the effort up buys index points and multiplies the bill. Here max costs 5.3× low for +6.5 on the index — 2.7 points per doubling of spend. Compare that with other models.

low $1.10max $5.86

How its index has moved

8 Sept 2026 to 3 Oct 2026
626874
  • high
  • max
  • xhigh
  • not stated

The index is recomputed from scratch every day, so a line moves when a new benchmark result lands, when a publisher revises a score, or when the models it is normalised against change. Early movement usually means the score is still settling.

Benchmark results

One column per reasoning effort. Rank is among every configuration of every model on that benchmark. Hover a score for the run it came from.

Reasoning

Benchmarklowmediumhighxhighmaxnot statedSourceTrend
GPQA Diamond87.9%#59–––93.9%#1492.9%#21Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
SimpleBench–––––80.6%#2SimpleBench
LMArena Hard Prompts––1515#12–1514#13–LMArena
LiveBench Reasoningnot in index––––91.2%#8–LiveBench
GPQA Diamond (AA)not in index88.9%#8291.9%#4493.7%#1193.7%#1193.2%#22–Artificial Analysis
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)not in index43.4%#5251.3%#2252.8%#1854.4%#1454.9%#10–Artificial Analysis
GPQA Diamond (Vals)not in index–––––93.4%#7Vals AI
ARC-AGI-1––97.5%#10–97.5%#10–ARC Prize
ARC-AGI-2––88.3%#20–90.4%#12–ARC Prize
ARC-AGI-3––30.2%#13–––ARC Prize
CritPt23.1%#4826.9%#3428.3%#2527.7%#2729.1%#19–Artificial Analysis
MysteryMechanismnot in index–––––37.4%#7Vals AI
Chess Puzzlesnot in index20.0%#85–––42.0%#2133.0%#45Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
Mystery Game Puzzlesnot in index––––59.0%#537.0%#15Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
LMCAnot in index62.6%#1562.9%#1363.7%#1064.5%#663.3%#12–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
DTBenchnot in index93.1%#5294.9%#3497.9%#397.9%#397.6%#5–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
BTF-3not in index–––12.0%#13––Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub

Coding

Benchmarklowmediumhighxhighmaxnot statedSourceTrend
SciCode48.0%#11250.7%#9254.3%#5655.0%#4856.4%#35–SciCode
WeirdML––91.6%#8–91.8%#786.3%#13WeirdML
FrontierCode––––53.4%#3–Cognition
LMArena Coding––1533#15–1530#21–LMArena
LMArena WebDev––1660#12–1695#7–LMArena
LiveBench Codingnot in index––––81.5%#14–LiveBench
SciCode (AA)not in index49.2%#10751.5%#8655.4%#4655.7%#4256.4%#35–Artificial Analysis
LiveCodeBench–––––89.0%#4Vals AI
IOI–––––84.3%#8Vals AI
SWE-bench (Vals)not in index–––––97.0%#1Vals AI
Code Migrationnot in index–––––57.5%#6Vals AI
ProgramBenchnot in index–––––3.0%#4Vals AI
Vibe Code Bench 1-100not in index–––––28.5%#2Vals AI
Vibe Code Bench v1.1not in index–––––88.4%#8Vals AI
SWE Atlas: Codebase QnAnot in index–––63.2%#1––Scale AI SEAL
SWE Atlas: Test Writingnot in index–––62.2%#2––Scale AI SEAL
DeepSWEnot in index58.1%#3568.9%#1772.8%#773.2%#673.7%#3–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
CursorBenchnot in index40.7%#2643.3%#1944.7%#1646.1%#1446.6%#12–Cursor
ALE-Benchnot in index––2164.6#4–––Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
FrontierSWEnot in index––––52.0%#6–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)not in index26.3%#4334.3%#3446.0%#2146.5%#2049.0%#18–Artificial Analysis
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA)not in index76.4%#5986.1%#2187.6%#1888.0%#1289.1%#7–Artificial Analysis

Agents & tools

Benchmarklowmediumhighxhighmaxnot statedSourceTrend
Terminal-Bench34.9%#5044.9%#3750.3%#3053.9%#2451.8%#28–Terminal-Bench
OSWorld-Verified 2.022.3%#625.3%#529.0%#330.2%#231.4%#1–OSWorld
APEX-Agents––––65.8%#6–Mercor
LMArena Agent––8.7#7–7.9#9–LMArena
LiveBench Agentic Codingnot in index––––65.2%#5–LiveBench
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)–––––84.6%#5Vals AI
MCP Atlas–––85.8%#3––Scale AI SEAL
HiL-Bench–––––57.0%#2Scale AI SEAL
GDPval (AA)not in index39.7%#9148.8%#4754.0%#2958.8%#1260.4%#8–Artificial Analysis
τ²-Bench Banking (AA)30.3%#6338.6%#3644.7%#1643.3%#1942.1%#23–Artificial Analysis
Analyst Agent (AA)not in index––––53.8%#5–Artificial Analysis
CUA-benchnot in index––––9.0%#4–Vals AI
CyberBenchnot in index–––––65.4%#26Vals AI
Finance Agent v2not in index–––––58.6%#8Vals AI
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmarknot in index–––––6.7%#23Vals AI
Legal Research Benchnot in index–––––55.3%#1Vals AI
SkillsBenchnot in index–––––60.4%#8Vals AI
SREBenchnot in index–––––12.2%#8Vals AI
Tax Agent Benchnot in index–––––75.1%#3Vals AI
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)not in index–––––53.5%#7Vals AI
Terminal-Bench Sciencenot in index–––––27.1%#7Vals AI
Time Horizon Index: KSPnot in index–––––18.8%#4Vals AI
BALROGnot in index––––63.4%#2–BALROG
PostTrainBenchnot in index–––––35.0%#3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
GBAEvalnot in index–––––79.6%#1Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
Vending-Bench 2not in index–––––11181.9#4Andon Labs
AutomationBenchnot in index–54.3%#3253.6%#3453.2%#3556.6%#29–Artificial Analysis
GDP.pdfnot in index–20.0%#2719.6%#3021.0%#2521.6%#24–Artificial Analysis
Harvey LABnot in index––––93.5%#5–Harvey
EnterpriseOps-Gymnot in index––––47.5%#7–Artificial Analysis
AA-Briefcasenot in index–1435#321562#161636#101662#7–Artificial Analysis
FACTS Searchnot in index–––––85.3%#5Google

Maths

Benchmarklowmediumhighxhighmaxnot statedSourceTrend
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3––––85.6%#11–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
FrontierMath Tier 4––––73.2%#17–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
OTIS Mock AIME93.3%#51–––98.9%#1697.8%#24Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
ProofBench––––99.0%#4–Vals AI
LiveBench Mathematicsnot in index––––95.7%#14–LiveBench
LMArena Maths––1521#3–1516#7–LMArena

Knowledge

Benchmarklowmediumhighxhighmaxnot statedSourceTrend
SimpleQA Verified––––59.9%#16–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
LiveBench Data Analysisnot in index––––74.5%#35–LiveBench
AA-Omniscience28.6#3731.0#2933.7#2535.4#2337.1#22–Artificial Analysis
MMLU-Pro–––––91.6%#2Vals AI
LegalBench–––––87.0%#8Vals AI
CorpFin–––––73.2%#1Vals AI
TaxEval–––––75.1%#22Vals AI
BioMysteryBenchnot in index–––––79.3%#3Vals AI
Excel Modeling Benchmarknot in index–––––73.6%#6Vals AI
MedCodenot in index–––––63.6%#1Vals AI
MedScribenot in index–––––91.0%#4Vals AI
Public Benefits Benchnot in index–––––76.9%#1Vals AI
DrugDiscoveryBenchnot in index––––53.7%#4–Scale AI SEAL
EBR-benchnot in index––––45.7%#6–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
GDP.pdfnot in index––––24.0%#15–Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
AA-Omniscience: accuracynot in index56.0%#3457.1%#3158.9%#2459.5%#2260.9%#15–Artificial Analysis
AA-Omniscience: non-hallucinationnot in index37.8%#16039.3%#14838.8%#15340.5%#14439.2%#149–Artificial Analysis

Instruction following

Benchmarklowmediumhighxhighmaxnot statedSourceTrend
LiveBench Languagenot in index––––88.7%#5–LiveBench
LiveBench Instruction Followingnot in index––––63.8%#46–LiveBench
LMArena Instruction Followingnot in index––1496#8–1493#10–LMArena

Human preference

Benchmarklowmediumhighxhighmaxnot statedSourceTrend
LMArena Text––1490#13–1490#14–LMArena
EQ-Bench 4–––––1385#1EQ-Bench
LMArena Creative Writingnot in index––1471#13–1471#15–LMArena
LMArena Multi-turnnot in index––1484#32–1487#28–LMArena
LMArena Longer Queriesnot in index––1504#10–1500#14–LMArena

Multimodal

Benchmarklowmediumhighxhighmaxnot statedSourceTrend
LMArena Vision––1321#2–––LMArena
MMMU-Pro79.8%#5381.6%#3782.4%#3284.0%#2284.7%#15–Artificial Analysis
MMMU-Pro (Vals)not in index–––––89.9%#2Vals AI
MortgageTaxnot in index–––––72.1%#1Vals AI
SAGEnot in index–––––49.4%#21Vals AI
Blueprint-Bench 2not in index–––––30.4%#16Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub

Long context

Benchmarklowmediumhighxhighmaxnot statedSourceTrend
AA-LCR81.3%#5082.0%#4179.0%#9780.3%#6379.3%#89–Artificial Analysis
LMArena Documentnot in index––1490#7–––LMArena
MLCRnot in index–56.1%#759.4%#558.3%#655.6%#8–Artificial Analysis

Composite

Benchmarklowmediumhighxhighmaxnot statedSourceTrend
Epoch Capabilities Indexnot in index–––––162.9#5Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub
LiveBench––––80.1%#12–LiveBench
AA Intelligence Index39.4#6244.8#3548.1#2249.7#1850.8#16–Artificial Analysis
Vals Indexnot in index–––––63.7#5Vals AI
Vals Multimodal Indexnot in index–––––73.9%#2Vals AI

Safety & honesty

Benchmarklowmediumhighxhighmaxnot statedSourceTrend
FORTRESSnot in index–––––16.8%#48Scale AI SEAL

Where it wins

Benchmarks where this configuration ranks in the top five of every configuration measured.

Where to run it

Every provider serving this model through OpenRouter, with throughput and first-token latency measured on live traffic over the last 30 minutes and each provider’s own price. Purple marks the best in each column.

ProviderSpeedFirst tokenInput $/MOutput $/MContextQuantisation
Anthropic112 tok/s1.85 s$10.00$50.001M–
Google Vertex82 tok/s2.49 s$5.50$27.501M–
Google Vertex72 tok/s2.92 s$5.50$27.501M–
Google Vertex68 tok/s2.75 s$5.00$25.001M–
Claude Platform on AWS67 tok/s2.40 s$5.00$25.001M–
Amazon Bedrock65 tok/s4.60 s$5.00$25.001M–
Amazon Bedrock64 tok/s3.76 s$5.50$27.501M–
Anthropic62 tok/s3.44 s$5.00$25.001M–
Amazon Bedrock57 tok/s4.18 s$5.50$27.501M–

Price history

Listed price per 1M tokens over time, as recorded by OpenRouter for the provider with the longest history.

$0.00$7.56$15.13$22.69$30.25Aug 26Sept 26
input outputnow $5.50 in · $27.50 out

What a task costs

Estimates from list price, output speed and time to first answer for the best configuration. “With caching” assumes three-quarters of the input is served from the prompt cache at $0.500 per 1M. Reasoning tokens are not modelled.

WorkloadTokens in / outCostWith cachingTime
Chat reply400 / 300$0.0095$0.008125.3 s
Summarise a 30-page report12,000 / 600$0.075$0.03530.8 s
Code edit6,000 / 1,500$0.068$0.04747.4 s
Agentic coding session60,000 / 4,000$0.400$0.1981.6 min
Structured extraction2,000 / 200$0.015$0.008323.5 s

See also

Data as of 5 Oct 2026. Compare these configurations.

Cite as: BenchLeader, “Claude Opus 5: benchmarks, pricing, speed and rank”, https://www.benchleader.com/models/claude-opus-5, data as of 5 Oct 2026.