Model comparison
Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-4V
Claude Opus 5 has enough public results to be ranked (#4); GPT-4V does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- The widest gap is in multimodal, where Claude Opus 5 leads 51.1 to 32.5.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 5 | GPT-4V | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 67.7 | 35.8 |
| Released | 2026-07-24 | 2023-11-06 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | — |
| Results tracked | 57 | 1 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Claude Opus 5: 67.0 (#5), GPT-4V: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | GPT-4V |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | 73.6% | — |
| FrontierCode | 53.4% | — |
| CursorBench | 46.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1694 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 52% | — |
| SciCode | 56.4% | — |
| WeirdML | 91.8% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1533 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 2,165 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 5: 55.5 (#1), GPT-4V: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | GPT-4V |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 65.8% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 31.4% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 48.7% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 35% | — |
| BALROG | 63.4% | — |
| GBAEval | 79.6% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 24% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 11,182 | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Claude Opus 5: 77.1 (#3), GPT-4V: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | GPT-4V |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 90.4% | — |
| SimpleBench | 80.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 94.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | — |
| CritPt | 29.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 42% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 45.7% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1525 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 59% | — |
| DTBench | 97.9% | — |
| LMCA | 64.5% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.12 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 162.67 | — |
Math Not comparable
Claude Opus 5: 86.1 (#6), GPT-4V: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | GPT-4V |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 85.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 73.2% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.9% | — |
| ProofBench | 99% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1533 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Claude Opus 5: 66.8 (#8), GPT-4V: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | GPT-4V |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 93.9% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 59.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1558 | — |
Multimodal Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 51.1 (#6), GPT-4V: 32.5
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | GPT-4V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1321 | — |
| Video-MME | — | 59.9% |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 30.4% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 60.8% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1516 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude Opus 5: 58.8 (#3), GPT-4V: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | GPT-4V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1500 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1575 | — |
| LMArena French | 1522 | — |
| LMArena German | 1522 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1510 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1526 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1507 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1519 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude Opus 5: 79.3 (#5), GPT-4V: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | GPT-4V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1516 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude Opus 5: 46.5 (#20), GPT-4V: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | GPT-4V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1516 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude Opus 5: 79.3 (#2), GPT-4V: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | GPT-4V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1506 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1491 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2133 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1385 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1496 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 5 better than GPT-4V?
Claude Opus 5 has enough public results to be ranked (#4); GPT-4V does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5 and GPT-4V share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5 has 57 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4V has 1.