Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.6 vs Hy4 preview
Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 to 45.3 on the Noometry Index. Hy4 preview costs 8.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
TencentSummary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in 3 categories and Hy4 preview in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.6 leads 57.8 to 31.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 50% for Claude Opus 4.6 and 75% for Hy4 preview.
- Hy4 preview is cheaper at $0.83 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.6.
- Hy4 preview accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
- Hy4 preview has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.6 | Hy4 preview | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Tencent |
| Noometry Index | 58.2 | 45.3 |
| Released | 2026-02-04 | 2026-08-28 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 64K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | $0.83 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 68 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 4.6 leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 57.2 (#20), Hy4 preview: 51.6 (#38)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Hy4 preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1547 | 1632 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 78.7% | — |
| FrontierCode | 26.6% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 75.6% | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 72% | — |
| GSO | 41.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 78% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1536 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 996.5 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.47 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.6: 51.1 (#4), Hy4 preview: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Hy4 preview |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 79.8% | — |
| APEX-Agents | 46.3% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 4.2% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 27.3% | — |
| Cybench | 93% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 55.3% | — |
| GBAEval | 44.1% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1253 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 78.9% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 8,018 | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4.6 leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 57.8 (#23), Hy4 preview: 31.9 (#79)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Hy4 preview |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 92.1% | 68.2% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 69.2% | — |
| SimpleBench | 67.6% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 83.6% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 94% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 17% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 7.6% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 80.6% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 12.7% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1527 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 25% | — |
| DTBench | 91.2% | — |
| LMCA | 55.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.24 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60 | — |
Math Claude Opus 4.6 leads
Claude Opus 4.6: 63.0 (#31), Hy4 preview: 55.7 (#42)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Hy4 preview |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 50% | 75% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 66% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 78.5% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 94.4% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1519 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 40.7% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 22.9% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.6: 61.9 (#26), Hy4 preview: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Hy4 preview |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.5% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 34.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 47% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12.2% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1546 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.6: 37.3 (#74), Hy4 preview: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Hy4 preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1316 | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 28.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1507 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.6: 57.9 (#6), Hy4 preview: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Hy4 preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1489 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1551 | — |
| LMArena French | 1513 | — |
| LMArena German | 1502 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1484 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1464 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1497 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1510 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.6: 79.5 (#4), Hy4 preview: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Hy4 preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1523 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.6: 48.1 (#13), Hy4 preview: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Hy4 preview |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | 20.7% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 17% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1520 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.6: 73.5 (#10), Hy4 preview: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Hy4 preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1503 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1505 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1809 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1223 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1513 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Hy4 preview?
Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 to 45.3 on the Noometry Index. Hy4 preview costs 8.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or Hy4 preview?
Hy4 preview is cheaper. It lists at $0.83 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.6 lists at $5 and $25.
Is Claude Opus 4.6 or Hy4 preview better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 57.2 versus 51.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Hy4 preview does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.6 and Hy4 preview share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.6 has 68 scored results on Noometry and Hy4 preview has 3.