Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs Magistral Small

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index. Magistral Small costs 13× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.5 Anthropic

50.5

Rank #39 Confirmed

Magistral Small Mistral AI

29.9

Rank #289 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 4 categories and Magistral Small in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.5 leads 42.5 to 6.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 80% for Claude Opus 4.5 and 5% for Magistral Small.
  • Magistral Small is cheaper at $0.50 / $1.50 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.5.
  • Claude Opus 4.5 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 128K.
  • Magistral Small has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.5 and Magistral Small specifications
Claude Opus 4.5Magistral Small
ProviderAnthropicMistral AI
Noometry Index50.529.9
Released2025-11-012025-06-10
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K128K
Max output64K40K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.50
Output $ / M tokens$25$1.50
Results tracked6910

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 55.4 (#21), Magistral Small: 37.8 (#172)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Small
SWE-bench Verified76.7%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)76.8%—
LMArena WebDev1493—
SWE-bench Multilingual70.7%—
SciCode—35.2%
GSO26.5%—
WeirdML63.7%—
LMArena Coding1504—
ALE-Bench1,025—
AlgoTune1.77—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 47.2 (#11), Magistral Small: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Small
Terminal-Bench63.1%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard77.5%—
GDPval45.5%—
Remote Labor Index3.8%—
τ²-bench Airline84%—
τ²-bench Banking24.7%—
τ²-bench Retail79.6%—
τ²-bench Telecom92.3%—
Cybench82%—
DeepResearch Bench54.8%—
OSWorld66.3%—
BALROG43.5%—
LMArena Search1180—
METR Time Horizons75%—
Vending-Bench 24,967—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 42.5 (#43), Magistral Small: 6.9 (#345)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Small
ARC-AGI-237.6%0%
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.2%6.3%
ARC-AGI-180%5%
Chess Puzzles12%3%
DTBench89.9%61.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index150.1133.19
SimpleBench62%—
NYT Connections (extended)52.5%—
CritPt—0.3%
EnigmaEval11.9%—
EBR-Bench14.3%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1476—
Mystery Game Puzzles22%—
LMCA44.5%—
ForecastBench60.7—

Math Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 38.5 (#85), Magistral Small: 24.9 (#253)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Small
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.1%30%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)34.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%—
ProofBench36%—
LMArena Math1463—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)20.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 56.4 (#38), Magistral Small: 30.9 (#215)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Small
GPQA Diamond86%56.1%
Humanity's Last Exam25.2%—
SimpleQA Verified45.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.9%—
LMArena Expert1488—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 31.1 (#99), Magistral Small: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Small
GeoBench75%—
VPCT40%—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1462—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.5 (#45), Magistral Small: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Small
LMArena Non-English1438—
LMArena Chinese1470—
LMArena French1471—
LMArena German1449—
LMArena Japanese1415—
LMArena Korean1424—
LMArena Russian1448—
LMArena Spanish1455—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 77.7 (#20), Magistral Small: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Small
LMArena Instruction Following1478—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 46.4 (#21), Magistral Small: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Small
CL-bench21.1%—
LMArena Longer Query1480—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 68.2 (#28), Magistral Small: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Small
LMArena Text1451—
LMArena Creative Writing1445—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1687—
LMArena Multi-Turn1466—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than Magistral Small?

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index. Magistral Small costs 13× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.5 or Magistral Small?

Magistral Small is cheaper. It lists at $0.50 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.5 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.5 or Magistral Small better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.4 versus 37.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.5 does, with 200K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.5 and Magistral Small share?

8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and Magistral Small has 10.

Related comparisons

Go deeper