The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Opus 4.8 vs LFM3-1.7B

Claude Opus 4.8 leads the LLM Stats Score 49.6 to 25.0.

Anthropic · Liquid AI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Opus 4.8 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 49.6 to 25.0, ranking #22 overall.

In the 5 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Opus 4.8 wins 5; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude Opus 4.8

  • overall performance matters — it scores 49.6 and ranks #22 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 5 of 5 exact shared results

Choose LFM3-1.7B

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Opus 4.8
Anthropic
LFM3-1.7B
Liquid AI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
49.6
#22
25.0
#192
Reasoning
49.5
#16
20.8
#216
Coding
39.1
#22
7.4
#218
Agents
33.8
#37
18.1
#97
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
5 of 5
0 of 5
Input price
$5.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$25.00 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared
Index
Claude Opus 4.8
LFM3-1.7B
Math
39.9#16
7.6#285
Tool use
28.0#27
14.3#118
Long context
19.8#28
5.1#112
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

27 reported for Claude Opus 4.8 · 20 for LFM3-1.7B

5 shared

Claude Opus 4.8 outperforms in 5 benchmarks (GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, MCP Atlas, SWE-bench Multilingual, SWE-Bench Verified), while LFM3-1.7B is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.8 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Mon Nov 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude Opus 4.8 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Claude Opus 4.8 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.8
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Liquid AI
LFM3-1.7B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Mon Nov 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Opus 4.8 supports multimodal inputs, whereas LFM3-1.7B does not.

Claude Opus 4.8 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Opus 4.8

Text
Images
Audio
Video

LFM3-1.7B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 4.8 is licensed under a proprietary license, while LFM3-1.7B uses LFM Open License v1.0.

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

Claude Opus 4.8

Proprietary

Closed source

LFM3-1.7B

LFM Open License v1.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 4.8 was released on 2026-05-28, while LFM3-1.7B was released on 2026-10-27.

LFM3-1.7B is 5 months newer than Claude Opus 4.8.

Claude Opus 4.8

May 28, 2026

5 months ago

LFM3-1.7B

Oct 27, 2026

5 days ago

5mo 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

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Opus 4.8 and LFM3-1.7B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Opus 4.8
✓ Preferred
LFM3-1.7B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 4.8 vs LFM3-1.7B.

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.8 or LFM3-1.7B?

Claude Opus 4.8 leads the LLM Stats Score 49.6 to 25.0. Claude Opus 4.8 is made by Anthropic and LFM3-1.7B is made by Liquid AI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Opus 4.8 compare to LFM3-1.7B in benchmarks?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores GPQA: 93.6%, DeepSearchQA: 93.1%, CharXiv-R: 89.9%, SWE-Bench Verified: 88.6%, ScreenSpot Pro: 87.9%. LFM3-1.7B scores IFEval: 96.7%, Multi-IF: 89.1%, LiveCodeBench v6: 73.5%, IFBench: 73.0%, BFCL-V4: 71.4%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Opus 4.8 and LFM3-1.7B?

Claude Opus 4.8 supports 1.0M tokens and LFM3-1.7B supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Opus 4.8 and LFM3-1.7B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (49.6 vs 25.0), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs LFM Open License v1.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Opus 4.8 and LFM3-1.7B?

Claude Opus 4.8 is developed by Anthropic and LFM3-1.7B is developed by Liquid AI.

Related comparisons