Model comparison
Claude Opus 4 vs Llama 3.1-405B
Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 30.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 34 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 34 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4 scores higher in 9 categories and Llama 3.1-405B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4 leads 40.2 to 17.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 64.4% for Claude Opus 4 and 9.7% for Llama 3.1-405B.
- Llama 3.1-405B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4 | Llama 3.1-405B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 42.9 | 30.4 |
| Released | 2025-05-22 | 2024-07-23 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 200K | — |
| Max output | 32K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $15 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $75 | — |
| Results tracked | 56 | 42 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 47.8 (#55), Llama 3.1-405B: 32.7 (#257)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 43.7% | 21.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1442 | 1291 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 70.7% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 67.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 72% | — |
| GSO | 6.9% | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.33 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 34.5 (#39), Llama 3.1-405B: 20.9 (#131)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 38% | 7.5% |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 7.4% |
| DeepResearch Bench | 46.8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1127 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 63.9% | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 27.4 (#104), Llama 3.1-405B: 16.4 (#293)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 58.8% | 23% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 74.3% | 45% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1399 | 1270 |
| DTBench | 81.6% | 61.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 142.67 | 128.76 |
| ForecastBench | 61.1 | 59.9 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 8.6% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 35.7% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | — |
| LMCA | 37.4% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 82.9% |
| HellaSwag | — | 89.2% |
| PIQA | — | 85.9% |
| WinoGrande | — | 89.2% |
Math Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 40.2 (#80), Llama 3.1-405B: 17.3 (#283)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 64.4% | 9.7% |
| Omni-MATH | 61.6% | 24.9% |
| LMArena Math | 1391 | 1281 |
| MATH Level 5 | 85% | 49.8% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.5% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 43.9 (#82), Llama 3.1-405B: 30.4 (#221)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 76.3% | 50.9% |
| MMLU-Pro | 87.5% | 72.3% |
| Confabulations | 15.9% | 17.6% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 70.8% | 52.2% |
| LMArena Expert | 1384 | 1243 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 10.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 95.3% |
| MMLU | — | 84.5% |
| TriviaQA | — | 82.7% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 4: 30.9 (#101), Llama 3.1-405B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1192 | — |
| GeoBench | 49% | — |
| VPCT | 38% | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 49.0 (#133), Llama 3.1-405B: 40.9 (#209)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1362 | 1248 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1386 | 1242 |
| LMArena French | 1370 | 1278 |
| LMArena German | 1391 | 1252 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1332 | 1208 |
| LMArena Korean | 1318 | 1184 |
| LMArena Russian | 1392 | 1265 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1388 | 1259 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 77.3 (#26), Llama 3.1-405B: 66.1 (#209)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 91.8% | 81.1% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1406 | 1259 |
Long Context Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 39.5 (#167), Llama 3.1-405B: 38.4 (#192)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | 1266 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 61.4 (#85), Llama 3.1-405B: 39.1 (#246)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Llama 3.1-405B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1284 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1386 | 1262 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1580 | 870 |
| WildBench | 85.2% | 78.3% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | 1297 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4 better than Llama 3.1-405B?
Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 30.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Opus 4 or Llama 3.1-405B better for coding?
Claude Opus 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.8 versus 32.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4 and Llama 3.1-405B share?
34 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4 has 56 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-405B has 42.