Model Comparison

Claude 3 Opus vs o1Which is better in 2026?

o1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. o1 is 1.1x cheaper per token.

Verdict: Claude 3 Opus vs o1 — which is better?

Claude 3 Opus (by Anthropic) and o1 (by OpenAI) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

Claude 3 Opus outperforms in 1 benchmarks (MGSM), while o1 is better at 5 benchmarks (GPQA, GSM8k, HumanEval, MATH, MMLU). o1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

On price, o1 is roughly 1.1x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Choose Claude 3 Opus if…

  • you want predictable pricing at $15.00/M input and $75.00/M output

Choose o1 if…

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 5 of 6 shared benchmarks
  • cost matters — it's about 1.1x cheaper per token
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Dec 2024

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

6 benchmarks

Claude 3 Opus outperforms in 1 benchmarks (MGSM), while o1 is better at 5 benchmarks (GPQA, GSM8k, HumanEval, MATH, MMLU).

o1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sun Jul 05 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

o1 costs less

For input processing, Claude 3 Opus ($15.00/1M tokens) costs the same as o1 ($15.00/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude 3 Opus ($75.00/1M tokens) is 1.3x more expensive than o1 ($60.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude 3 Opus is more expensive than o1.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Sun Jul 05 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3 Opus
Input tokens$15.00
Output tokens$75.00
Best providerAnthropic
OpenAI
o1
Input tokens$15.00
Output tokens$60.00
Best providerAzure
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Both models have the same input context window of 200,000 tokens. Claude 3 Opus can generate longer responses up to 200,000 tokens, while o1 is limited to 100,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude 3 Opus
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
OpenAI
o1
Input200,000 tokens
Output100,000 tokens
Sun Jul 05 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Claude 3 Opus supports multimodal inputs, whereas o1 does not.

Claude 3 Opus can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude 3 Opus

Text
Images
Audio
Video

o1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.

Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.

Claude 3 Opus

Proprietary

Closed source

o1

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3 Opus was released on 2024-02-29, while o1 was released on 2024-12-17.

o1 is 10 months newer than Claude 3 Opus.

Claude 3 Opus

Feb 29, 2024

2.3 years ago

o1

Dec 17, 2024

1.5 years ago

9mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Claude 3 Opus is available from Anthropic, Bedrock, Google. o1 is available from Azure, OpenAI.

Claude 3 Opus

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $15.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $75.00/1M
bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $15.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $75.00/1M
google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $15.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $75.00/1M

o1

azure logo
Azure
Input Price:Input: $15.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $60.00/1M
openai logo
OpenAI
Input Price:Input: $15.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $60.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Supports multimodal inputs
Higher MGSM score (90.7% vs 89.3%)
OpenAI
Less expensive output tokens
Higher GPQA score (78.0% vs 50.4%)
Higher GSM8k score (97.1% vs 95.0%)
Higher HumanEval score (88.1% vs 84.9%)
Higher MATH score (96.4% vs 60.1%)
Higher MMLU score (91.8% vs 86.8%)

Detailed Comparison

Interactive Arena

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude 3 Opus and o1 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude 3 Opus
✓ Preferred
o1
Open in Playground
AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3 Opus
OpenAI
o1

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3 Opus vs o1.

Which is better, Claude 3 Opus or o1?

o1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude 3 Opus is made by Anthropic and o1 is made by OpenAI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Claude 3 Opus compare to o1 in benchmarks?

Claude 3 Opus scores ARC-C: 96.4%, HellaSwag: 95.4%, GSM8k: 95.0%, MGSM: 90.7%, BIG-Bench Hard: 86.8%. o1 scores GSM8k: 97.1%, MATH: 96.4%, GPQA Physics: 92.8%, MMLU: 91.8%, MGSM: 89.3%.

Is Claude 3 Opus cheaper than o1?

Both models cost $15.00 per million input tokens.

What are the context window sizes for Claude 3 Opus and o1?

Claude 3 Opus supports 200K tokens and o1 supports 200K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude 3 Opus and o1?

Key differences include multimodal support (yes vs no). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude 3 Opus and o1?

Claude 3 Opus is developed by Anthropic and o1 is developed by OpenAI.

Related comparisons