Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5 vs Llama 4 Maverick

Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.8 to 30.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 4 Maverick costs 33× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 32 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5 Anthropic

67.8

Rank #4 Confirmed

Llama 4 Maverick Meta

30.9

Rank #282 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 32 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5 scores higher in 10 categories and Llama 4 Maverick in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 5 leads 77.2 to 10.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 97.5% for Claude Opus 5 and 4.4% for Llama 4 Maverick.
  • Llama 4 Maverick is cheaper at $0.19 / $0.65 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 5.
  • Claude Opus 5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
  • Llama 4 Maverick has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5Llama 4 Maverick
ProviderAnthropicMeta
Noometry Index67.830.9
Released2026-07-242025-04-05
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M128K
Max output128K4K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.19
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.65
Results tracked5754

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 67.5 (#5), Llama 4 Maverick: 26.6 (#324)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama 4 Maverick
SciCode56.4%33.1%
WeirdML91.8%24.5%
LMArena Coding15341302
ALE-Bench2,165172.97
DeepSWE73.6%—
FrontierCode53.4%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—21%
Aider Polyglot—15.6%
CursorBench46.6%—
LMArena WebDev1691—
FrontierSWE52%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—49.7%
BigCodeBench Complete—61.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 55.6 (#1), Llama 4 Maverick: 28.2 (#91)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama 4 Maverick
APEX-Agents65.8%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—37.3%
OSWorld 2.031.4%—
τ²-bench Banking48.7%—
PostTrainBench35%—
BALROG63.4%—
GBAEval79.6%—
GDP.pdf24%—
Vending-Bench 211,182—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 77.2 (#4), Llama 4 Maverick: 10.1 (#342)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama 4 Maverick
ARC-AGI-290.4%0%
SimpleBench80.6%27.7%
NYT Connections (extended)94.3%8%
ARC-AGI-197.5%4.4%
CritPt29.1%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts15261281
DTBench97.9%61.9%
LMCA64.5%15.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index162.78132.2
Kagi LLM Benchmark—55.9%
Chess Puzzles42%—
EnigmaEval—0.6%
EBR-Bench45.7%—
Mystery Game Puzzles59%—
Bench to the Future 30.12—
ForecastBench—57.5

Math Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 86.2 (#8), Llama 4 Maverick: 26.0 (#262)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama 4 Maverick
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.9%20.6%
LMArena Math15311299
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)85.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 473.2%—
ProofBench99%—
Omni-MATH—42.2%
MATH Level 5—73%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—0.7%

Knowledge Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 66.8 (#9), Llama 4 Maverick: 33.4 (#204)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama 4 Maverick
GPQA Diamond93.9%67%
LMArena Expert15571259
Humanity's Last Exam—5.7%
SimpleQA Verified59.9%—
MMLU-Pro—81%
Confabulations—22.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—8.2%
GPQA (HELM)—65%

Multimodal Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 50.8 (#8), Llama 4 Maverick: 31.6 (#105)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama 4 Maverick
LMArena Vision13191142
GeoBench—52%
Blueprint-Bench 230.4%—
Furniture Assembly60.8%—
LMArena Document1516—
SpatialViz-Bench—31.8%

Multilingual Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 58.8 (#4), Llama 4 Maverick: 42.2 (#195)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama 4 Maverick
LMArena Non-English15011269
LMArena Chinese15741277
LMArena French15191259
LMArena German15241291
LMArena Japanese15161207
LMArena Korean15211203
LMArena Russian15071286
LMArena Spanish15191293

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 79.2 (#7), Llama 4 Maverick: 71.7 (#146)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama 4 Maverick
LMArena Instruction Following15171267
IFEval—90.8%

Long Context Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 46.5 (#21), Llama 4 Maverick: 31.4 (#279)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama 4 Maverick
LMArena Longer Query15151280
Fiction.LiveBench—46.2%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 79.2 (#1), Llama 4 Maverick: 38.8 (#252)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama 4 Maverick
LMArena Text15071287
LMArena Creative Writing14911267
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2133860
LMArena Multi-Turn14991289
Short-Story Creative Writing—62%
WildBench—80%
EQ-Bench 41385—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5 better than Llama 4 Maverick?

Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.8 to 30.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 4 Maverick costs 33× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5 or Llama 4 Maverick?

Llama 4 Maverick is cheaper. It lists at $0.19 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 5 or Llama 4 Maverick better for coding?

Claude Opus 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 67.5 versus 26.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 5 does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5 and Llama 4 Maverick share?

32 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5 has 57 scored results on Noometry and Llama 4 Maverick has 54.

Related comparisons

Go deeper