Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Mixtral 8x7B

Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Mixtral 8x7B costs 14× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.6 Anthropic

58.2

Rank #20 Confirmed

Mixtral 8x7B Mistral AI

27.1

Rank #334 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in 8 categories and Mixtral 8x7B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Opus 4.6 leads 61.9 to 11.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 90.5% for Claude Opus 4.6 and 30.6% for Mixtral 8x7B.
  • Mixtral 8x7B is cheaper at $0.70 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.6.
  • Claude Opus 4.6 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 32K.
  • Mixtral 8x7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.6Mixtral 8x7B
ProviderAnthropicMistral AI
Noometry Index58.227.1
Released2026-02-042023-12-11
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M32K
Max output128K32K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.70
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.70
Results tracked6838

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), Mixtral 8x7B: 32.8 (#269)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Mixtral 8x7B
LMArena Coding15361126
SWE-bench Verified78.7%—
FrontierCode26.6%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)75.6%—
LMArena WebDev1547—
SWE-bench Multilingual72%—
GSO41.2%—
WeirdML78%—
ALE-Bench996.5—
AlgoTune1.47—
HumanEval+—39.6%
MBPP+—49.7%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 51.1 (#4), Mixtral 8x7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Mixtral 8x7B
Terminal-Bench79.8%—
APEX-Agents46.3%—
Remote Labor Index4.2%—
τ²-bench Banking27.3%—
Cybench93%—
DeepResearch Bench55.3%—
GBAEval44.1%—
LMArena Search1253—
METR Time Horizons78.9%—
Vending-Bench 28,018—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.8 (#23), Mixtral 8x7B: 18.2 (#285)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Mixtral 8x7B
LMArena Hard Prompts15271115
DTBench91.2%49.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index155.24118.47
ForecastBench6056.3
ARC-AGI-269.2%—
SimpleBench67.6%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)92.1%—
ARC-AGI-194%—
Chess Puzzles17%—
EnigmaEval7.6%—
Thematic Generalization80.6%—
EBR-Bench12.7%—
Mystery Game Puzzles25%—
LMCA55.8%—
Adversarial NLI—55.2%
HellaSwag—86.7%
PIQA—83.6%
WinoGrande—77.2%

Math Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 63.0 (#31), Mixtral 8x7B: 18.8 (#289)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Mixtral 8x7B
LMArena Math15191147
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%—
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions78.5%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202594.4%—
ProofBench50%—
Omni-MATH—10.5%
MATH Level 5—10%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)40.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%—
GSM8K—74.4%

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 61.9 (#26), Mixtral 8x7B: 11.0 (#301)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Mixtral 8x7B
GPQA Diamond90.5%30.6%
LMArena Expert15461088
Humanity's Last Exam34.4%—
SimpleQA Verified47%—
MMLU-Pro—33.5%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12.2%—
GPQA (HELM)—29.6%
ARC (AI2) Challenge—87.3%
MMLU—70.6%
OpenBookQA—85.8%
TriviaQA—82.2%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 37.3 (#74), Mixtral 8x7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Mixtral 8x7B
LMArena Vision1316—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1507—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.9 (#6), Mixtral 8x7B: 29.6 (#266)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Mixtral 8x7B
LMArena Non-English14891077
LMArena Chinese15511055
LMArena French15131166
LMArena German15021114
LMArena Japanese1484931
LMArena Korean1464968
LMArena Russian14971090
LMArena Spanish15101111

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 79.5 (#4), Mixtral 8x7B: 51.0 (#297)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Mixtral 8x7B
LMArena Instruction Following15231109
IFEval—57.5%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 48.1 (#13), Mixtral 8x7B: 33.4 (#260)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Mixtral 8x7B
LMArena Longer Query15201103
CL-bench20.7%—
CL-bench Life17%—

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 73.5 (#10), Mixtral 8x7B: 34.2 (#270)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Mixtral 8x7B
LMArena Text15031132
LMArena Creative Writing15051109
LMArena Multi-Turn15131115
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1809—
WildBench—67.3%
EQ-Bench 41223—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Mixtral 8x7B?

Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Mixtral 8x7B costs 14× 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 Mixtral 8x7B?

Mixtral 8x7B is cheaper. It lists at $0.70 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.6 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.6 or Mixtral 8x7B better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 57.2 versus 32.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.6 does, with 1M tokens against 32K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.6 and Mixtral 8x7B share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.6 has 68 scored results on Noometry and Mixtral 8x7B has 38.

Related comparisons

Go deeper