Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Ring-2.6-1T

Claude Opus 4.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#136); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.1 Anthropic

40.8

Rank #136 Confirmed

Ring-2.6-1T Ant Group (inclusionAI)

36.3

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 2 categories and Ring-2.6-1T in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.1 leads 31.6 to 25.3.
  • Ring-2.6-1T has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.1Ring-2.6-1T
ProviderAnthropicAnt Group (inclusionAI)
Noometry Index40.836.3
Released2025-08-052026-05-14
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K—
Max output32K—
Input $ / M tokens$15—
Output $ / M tokens$75—
Results tracked483

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 44.3 (#69), Ring-2.6-1T: 40.1

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Ring-2.6-1T
ALE-Bench674.77432.57
SWE-bench Verified73.3%—
LMArena WebDev1390—
SciCode—42.4%
WeirdML45.9%—
LMArena Coding1479—
AlgoTune1.34—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 34.8 (#38), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Ring-2.6-1T
Terminal-Bench38%—
GDPval43.6%—
Cybench42%—
DeepResearch Bench48.3%—
LMArena Search1148—
METR Time Horizons66.8%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 31.6 (#70), Ring-2.6-1T: 25.3

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Ring-2.6-1T
SimpleBench60%—
CritPt—3.7%
Chess Puzzles7%—
EnigmaEval7.2%—
EBR-Bench7.9%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1443—
Mystery Game Puzzles21%—
DTBench80%—
LMCA37.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index144.11—
ForecastBench62—

Math Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 22.0 (#267), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Ring-2.6-1T
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)12.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202568.9%—
LMArena Math1430—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)7.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 41.9 (#93), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Ring-2.6-1T
GPQA Diamond77.3%—
Humanity's Last Exam11.5%—
Confabulations17.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.8%—
LMArena Expert1439—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 26.2 (#114), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Ring-2.6-1T
VPCT35%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 52.1 (#90), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Non-English1405—
LMArena Chinese1427—
LMArena French1432—
LMArena German1412—
LMArena Japanese1378—
LMArena Korean1381—
LMArena Russian1421—
LMArena Spanish1448—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 75.8 (#53), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Instruction Following1436—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#60), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Longer Query1455—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 62.6 (#70), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Text1419—
LMArena Creative Writing1412—
Short-Story Creative Writing84.7%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1444—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Ring-2.6-1T?

Claude Opus 4.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#136); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Is Claude Opus 4.1 or Ring-2.6-1T better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 40.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and Ring-2.6-1T share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Ring-2.6-1T has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper