Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-4
Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 27 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher in 8 categories and GPT-4 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.8 leads 78.4 to 10.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 98.3% for Claude Opus 4.8 and 1.1% for GPT-4.
- Claude Opus 4.8 is cheaper at $5 / $25 per million input/output tokens, against $30 / $60 for GPT-4.
- Claude Opus 4.8 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 8K.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.8 | GPT-4 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 60.7 | 29.1 |
| Released | 2026-05-28 | 2023-03-14 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 8K |
| Max output | 128K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | $30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | $60 |
| Results tracked | 65 | 38 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 59.9 (#12), GPT-4: 31.6 (#283)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | GPT-4 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 82.9% | 12.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1490 | 1254 |
| DeepSWE | 59% | — |
| FrontierCode | 46.5% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1556 | — |
| SciCode | 53.5% | — |
| GSO | 47.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 46% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 57.2% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,564 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 79.3% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#11), GPT-4: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | GPT-4 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 48.9% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 20.6% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 8.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 39.7% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 50.2% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 33.8% | — |
| GBAEval | 70.9% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 24% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1204 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 36.1% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,787 | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 64.7 (#16), GPT-4: 17.8 (#289)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | GPT-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 34% | 4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1482 | 1241 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 36% | 12% |
| DTBench | 94.9% | 62.7% |
| LMCA | 57.5% | 17.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 158.21 | 125.89 |
| ForecastBench | 59.9 | 57.8 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 72.1% | — |
| SimpleBench | 64.8% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 88.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 91.1% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 92.5% | — |
| CritPt | 20.9% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 23.5% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 28.6% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 87.5% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.14 | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 75.1% |
| HellaSwag | — | 95.3% |
| WinoGrande | — | 87.5% |
Math Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 78.4 (#13), GPT-4: 10.8 (#309)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | GPT-4 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.3% | 1.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1487 | 1269 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 80% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 56.1% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 91.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 69% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 23% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 47.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 31.3% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 92% |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#29), GPT-4: 18.4 (#282)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | GPT-4 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 91% | 35.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1502 | 1211 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 53% | — |
| MMLU | — | 86.4% |
| TriviaQA | — | 84.8% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.8: 42.9 (#26), GPT-4: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | GPT-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1294 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 14.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 42.5% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1475 | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 55.2 (#33), GPT-4: 40.6 (#215)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | GPT-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1450 | 1246 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | 1242 |
| LMArena French | 1481 | 1283 |
| LMArena German | 1472 | 1251 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1440 | 1209 |
| LMArena Korean | 1432 | 1184 |
| LMArena Russian | 1474 | 1251 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1466 | 1261 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 77.4 (#24), GPT-4: 65.3 (#222)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | GPT-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1476 | 1241 |
Long Context Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#35), GPT-4: 37.7 (#212)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | GPT-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1483 | 1244 |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 72.0 (#16), GPT-4: 34.9 (#268)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | GPT-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1461 | 1263 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1454 | 1244 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1840 | 752 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1476 | 1257 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1281 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than GPT-4?
Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 or GPT-4?
Claude Opus 4.8 is cheaper. It lists at $5 per million input tokens and $25 per million output tokens; GPT-4 lists at $30 and $60.
Is Claude Opus 4.8 or GPT-4 better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 versus 31.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Opus 4.8 does, with 1M tokens against 8K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-4 share?
27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.8 has 65 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4 has 38.