Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-4o

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4o costs 2.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 36 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic

60.7

Rank #13 Confirmed

GPT-4o OpenAI

28.6

Rank #324 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 36 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher in 10 categories and GPT-4o in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.8 leads 78.4 to 10.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 98.3% for Claude Opus 4.8 and 6.4% for GPT-4o.
  • GPT-4o is cheaper at $2.50 / $10 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.8.
  • Claude Opus 4.8 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.8GPT-4o
ProviderAnthropicOpenAI
Noometry Index60.728.6
Released2026-05-282024-05-13
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M128K
Max output128K16K
Input $ / M tokens$5$2.50
Output $ / M tokens$25$10
Results tracked6572

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-4o: 24.8 (#328)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4o
GSO47.1%0%
WeirdML82.9%25.1%
LMArena Coding14901297
SWE-bench Verified—31%
DeepSWE59%—
FrontierCode46.5%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—21.6%
Aider Polyglot—45.3%
LMArena WebDev1556—
SciCode53.5%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—51.1%
LiveBench Coding—51.4%
BigCodeBench Complete—61.1%
CadEval—26%
ALE-Bench1,564—
HumanEval+—87.2%
MBPP+—72.2%

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#11), GPT-4o: 21.0 (#141)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4o
LMArena Search12041006
APEX-Agents48.9%—
OSWorld 2.020.6%—
GDPval—9.9%
Remote Labor Index8.3%—
TheAgentCompany—8.6%
τ²-bench Banking39.7%—
Cybench—12.5%
DeepResearch Bench50.2%—
PostTrainBench33.8%—
BALROG—32.3%
GBAEval70.9%—
GDP.pdf24%—
METR Time Horizons—40.8%
Vending-Bench 25,787—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 64.7 (#16), GPT-4o: 9.4 (#343)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4o
ARC-AGI-272.1%0%
SimpleBench64.8%17.8%
ARC-AGI-192.5%4.5%
CritPt20.9%0%
Chess Puzzles34%13%
EnigmaEval23.5%0.8%
LMArena Hard Prompts14821281
DTBench94.9%64.5%
LMCA57.5%16.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index158.21128.97
ForecastBench59.957.7
Kagi LLM Benchmark88.8%—
NYT Connections (extended)91.1%—
EBR-Bench28.6%—
LiveBench Reasoning—55.8%
Mystery Game Puzzles36%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—60.9%
Surface Evolver Bench87.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.14—
LiveBench—55.3%

Math Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 78.4 (#13), GPT-4o: 10.6 (#312)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4o
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)80%0.4%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.3%6.4%
LMArena Math14871285
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)47.2%0.3%
FrontierMath Tier 456.1%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions91.8%—
ProofBench69%—
Omni-MATH—29.3%
LiveBench Math—49.5%
MATH Level 5—53.3%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)31.3%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#29), GPT-4o: 28.8 (#242)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4o
GPQA Diamond91%49.2%
SimpleQA Verified53%26%
LMArena Expert15021250
Humanity's Last Exam—2.7%
MMLU-Pro—71.3%
Confabulations—15.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—9.6%
GPQA (HELM)—52%
MMLU—88.1%

Multimodal Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 42.9 (#26), GPT-4o: 34.5 (#91)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4o
LMArena Vision12941137
Video-MME—71.9%
GeoBench—71%
VPCT—40%
Blueprint-Bench 214.5%—
Furniture Assembly42.5%—
LMArena Document1475—
ScienceQA—88.5%

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 55.2 (#33), GPT-4o: 43.2 (#186)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4o
LMArena Non-English14501283
LMArena Chinese15071277
LMArena French14811304
LMArena German14721282
LMArena Japanese14401257
LMArena Korean14321234
LMArena Russian14741286
LMArena Spanish14661292

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 77.4 (#24), GPT-4o: 66.6 (#207)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4o
LMArena Instruction Following14761278
LiveBench Instruction Following—68.6%
IFEval—81.7%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#35), GPT-4o: 39.4 (#179)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4o
LMArena Longer Query14831289
Fiction.LiveBench—66.7%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 72.0 (#16), GPT-4o: 52.6 (#166)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4o
LMArena Text14611300
LMArena Creative Writing14541292
LMArena Multi-Turn14761302
Short-Story Creative Writing—81.8%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1840—
WildBench—82.8%
EQ-Bench 41281—
LiveBench Language—47.6%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than GPT-4o?

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4o costs 2.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 or GPT-4o?

GPT-4o is cheaper. It lists at $2.50 per million input tokens and $10 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.8 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.8 or GPT-4o better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 versus 24.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.8 does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-4o share?

36 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.8 has 65 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4o has 72.

Related comparisons

Go deeper