Model Comparison

Claude Opus 4 vs Magistral Small 2506

Claude Opus 4 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

2 benchmarks

Claude Opus 4 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (AIME 2025, GPQA), while Magistral Small 2506 is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sun Apr 19 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Sun Apr 19 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4
Input tokens$15.00
Output tokens$75.00
Best providerAnthropic
Mistral AI
Magistral Small 2506
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude Opus 4 specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude Opus 4 specifies output context (32,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Opus 4
Input200,000 tokens
Output32,000 tokens
Mistral AI
Magistral Small 2506
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Sun Apr 19 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Claude Opus 4 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Magistral Small 2506 does not.

Claude Opus 4 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Opus 4

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Magistral Small 2506

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 4 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Magistral Small 2506 uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude Opus 4

Proprietary

Closed source

Magistral Small 2506

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 4 was released on 2025-05-22, while Magistral Small 2506 was released on 2025-06-10.

Magistral Small 2506 is 1 month newer than Claude Opus 4.

Claude Opus 4

May 22, 2025

11 months ago

Magistral Small 2506

Jun 10, 2025

10 months ago

2w newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Magistral Small 2506 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2025-06-01, while Claude Opus 4's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Magistral Small 2506's training data extends to 2025-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Claude Opus 4's cutoff date.

Claude Opus 4

—

Magistral Small 2506

Jun 2025

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Supports multimodal inputs
Higher AIME 2025 score (75.5% vs 62.8%)
Higher GPQA score (79.6% vs 68.2%)
Mistral AI
Has open weights
AnthropicClaude Opus 4
Mistral AIMagistral Small 2506
Compare in Playground

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4
Mistral AI
Magistral Small 2506

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 4 vs Magistral Small 2506

Claude Opus 4 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude Opus 4 is made by Anthropic and Magistral Small 2506 is made by Mistral AI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude Opus 4 scores MMMLU: 88.8%, TAU-bench Retail: 81.4%, GPQA: 79.6%, MMMU (validation): 76.5%, AIME 2025: 75.5%. Magistral Small 2506 scores AIME 2024: 70.7%, GPQA: 68.2%, AIME 2025: 62.8%, LiveCodeBench: 51.3%.
Claude Opus 4 supports 200K tokens and Magistral Small 2506 supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude Opus 4 is developed by Anthropic and Magistral Small 2506 is developed by Mistral AI.