Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Claude Opus 4.8

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 41.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 37 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.1 Anthropic

41.0

Rank #142 Confirmed

Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic

60.7

Rank #13 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 37 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 0 categories and Claude Opus 4.8 in 10 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.8 leads 78.4 to 22.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 12.6% for Claude Opus 4.1 and 80% for Claude Opus 4.8.
  • Claude Opus 4.8 is cheaper at $5 / $25 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.1.
  • Claude Opus 4.8 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.1 and Claude Opus 4.8 specifications
Claude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.8
ProviderAnthropicAnthropic
Noometry Index41.060.7
Released2025-08-052026-05-28
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window200K1M
Max output32K128K
Input $ / M tokens$15$5
Output $ / M tokens$75$25
Results tracked4865

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 44.4 (#73), Claude Opus 4.8: 59.9 (#12)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena WebDev13901556
WeirdML45.9%82.9%
LMArena Coding14791490
ALE-Bench674.771,564
SWE-bench Verified73.3%—
DeepSWE—59%
FrontierCode—46.5%
SciCode—53.5%
GSO—47.1%
AlgoTune1.34—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 35.0 (#41), Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#11)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.8
DeepResearch Bench48.3%50.2%
LMArena Search11481204
Terminal-Bench38%—
APEX-Agents—48.9%
OSWorld 2.0—20.6%
GDPval43.6%—
Remote Labor Index—8.3%
τ²-bench Banking—39.7%
Cybench42%—
PostTrainBench—33.8%
GBAEval—70.9%
GDP.pdf—24%
METR Time Horizons66.8%—
Vending-Bench 2—5,787

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 32.2 (#76), Claude Opus 4.8: 64.7 (#16)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.8
SimpleBench60%64.8%
Chess Puzzles7%34%
EnigmaEval7.2%23.5%
EBR-Bench7.9%28.6%
LMArena Hard Prompts14431482
Mystery Game Puzzles21%36%
DTBench80%94.9%
LMCA37.1%57.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index144.12158.21
ForecastBench6259.9
ARC-AGI-2—72.1%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—88.8%
NYT Connections (extended)—91.1%
ARC-AGI-1—92.5%
CritPt—20.9%
Surface Evolver Bench—87.5%
Bench to the Future 3—0.14

Math Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 22.3 (#277), Claude Opus 4.8: 78.4 (#13)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.8
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)12.6%80%
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%56.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202568.9%98.3%
LMArena Math14311487
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)7.2%47.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%31.3%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—91.8%
ProofBench—69%

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 42.0 (#101), Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#29)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.8
GPQA Diamond77.3%91%
LMArena Expert14391502
Humanity's Last Exam11.5%—
SimpleQA Verified—53%
Confabulations17.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.8%—

Multimodal Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 26.8 (#119), Claude Opus 4.8: 42.9 (#26)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Vision—1294
VPCT35%—
Blueprint-Bench 2—14.5%
Furniture Assembly—42.5%
LMArena Document—1475

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 52.0 (#95), Claude Opus 4.8: 55.2 (#33)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Non-English14051450
LMArena Chinese14271507
LMArena French14311481
LMArena German14131472
LMArena Japanese13781440
LMArena Korean13801432
LMArena Russian14221474
LMArena Spanish14481466

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 75.6 (#58), Claude Opus 4.8: 77.4 (#24)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Instruction Following14351476

Long Context Too close to call

Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#63), Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#35)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Longer Query14551483

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 62.4 (#74), Claude Opus 4.8: 72.0 (#16)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text14191461
LMArena Creative Writing14121454
LMArena Multi-Turn14441476
Short-Story Creative Writing84.7%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1840
EQ-Bench 4—1281

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Claude Opus 4.8?

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 41.0 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or Claude Opus 4.8?

Claude Opus 4.8 is cheaper. It lists at $5 per million input tokens and $25 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.

Is Claude Opus 4.1 or Claude Opus 4.8 better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 versus 44.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.8 does, with 1M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and Claude Opus 4.8 share?

37 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Claude Opus 4.8 has 65.

Related comparisons

Go deeper