The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Opus 5.5 vs LongCat-Flash-Thinking

Claude Opus 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 59.7 to 28.6. LongCat-Flash-Thinking is 15.2x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Meituan · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Opus 5.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 59.7 to 28.6, ranking #1 overall.

On price, LongCat-Flash-Thinking is roughly 15.2x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude Opus 5.5 also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

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

Choose Claude Opus 5.5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 59.7 and ranks #1 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose LongCat-Flash-Thinking

  • cost matters — it's about 15.2x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Opus 5.5
Anthropic
LongCat-Flash-Thinking
Meituan
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
59.7
#1
28.6
#139
Reasoning
57.8
#1
28.8
#130
Coding
51.7
#1
14.0
#141
Agents
44.5
#2
12.9
#101
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$4.00 / M
$0.30 / M
Output price
$20.00 / M
$1.20 / M
Context window
1,000,000
128,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Claude Opus 5.5
LongCat-Flash-Thinking
Math
42.5#5
28.1#96
Tool use
32.9#2
15.5#88
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

31 reported for Claude Opus 5.5 · 14 for LongCat-Flash-Thinking

No common benchmarks found

Claude Opus 5.5 and LongCat-Flash-Thinkingdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

LongCat-Flash-Thinking costs less

For input processing, Claude Opus 5.5 ($4.00/1M tokens) is 13.3x more expensive than LongCat-Flash-Thinking ($0.30/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Opus 5.5 ($20.00/1M tokens) is 16.7x more expensive than LongCat-Flash-Thinking ($1.20/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Opus 5.5 is more expensive than LongCat-Flash-Thinking.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Wed Sep 23 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Opus 5.5
Input tokens$4.00
Output tokens$20.00
Best providerAnthropic
Meituan
LongCat-Flash-Thinking
Input tokens$0.30
Output tokens$1.20
Best providerMeituan
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Opus 5.5 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to LongCat-Flash-Thinking's 128,000 tokens. Both models can generate responses up to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Opus 5.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Meituan
LongCat-Flash-Thinking
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Wed Sep 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Opus 5.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas LongCat-Flash-Thinking does not.

Claude Opus 5.5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Opus 5.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

LongCat-Flash-Thinking

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 5.5 is licensed under a proprietary license, while LongCat-Flash-Thinking uses MIT.

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

Claude Opus 5.5

Proprietary

Closed source

LongCat-Flash-Thinking

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 5.5 was released on 2026-09-22, while LongCat-Flash-Thinking was released on 2025-09-22.

Claude Opus 5.5 is 12 months newer than LongCat-Flash-Thinking.

Claude Opus 5.5

Sep 22, 2026

0 days ago

1.0yr newer
LongCat-Flash-Thinking

Sep 22, 2025

1.0 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Opus 5.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while LongCat-Flash-Thinking's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Claude Opus 5.5's training data extends to 2026-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without LongCat-Flash-Thinking's cutoff date.

Claude Opus 5.5

Jun 2026

LongCat-Flash-Thinking

—

Provider Availability

Claude Opus 5.5 is available from Anthropic. LongCat-Flash-Thinking is available from Meituan.

Claude Opus 5.5

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $4.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $20.00/1M

LongCat-Flash-Thinking

meituan logo
Meituan
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Opus 5.5 and LongCat-Flash-Thinking side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Opus 5.5
✓ Preferred
LongCat-Flash-Thinking
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 5.5 vs LongCat-Flash-Thinking.

Which is better, Claude Opus 5.5 or LongCat-Flash-Thinking?

Claude Opus 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 59.7 to 28.6. Claude Opus 5.5 is made by Anthropic and LongCat-Flash-Thinking is made by Meituan. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Opus 5.5 compare to LongCat-Flash-Thinking in benchmarks?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores BenchCAD (with Python tool): 96.2%, Global-MMLU: 94.3%, SWE-bench Multilingual: 93.9%, MILU: 93.1%, ArXivMath: 91.2%. LongCat-Flash-Thinking scores MATH-500: 99.2%, ZebraLogic: 95.5%, AIME 2024: 93.3%, AIME 2025: 90.6%, MMLU-Redux: 89.3%.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 cheaper than LongCat-Flash-Thinking?

LongCat-Flash-Thinking is 13.3x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4.00/M input and $20.00/M output via anthropic. LongCat-Flash-Thinking costs $0.30/M input and $1.20/M output via meituan.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Opus 5.5 and LongCat-Flash-Thinking?

Claude Opus 5.5 supports 1.0M tokens and LongCat-Flash-Thinking supports 128K 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 5.5 and LongCat-Flash-Thinking?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (59.7 vs 28.6), context window (1.0M vs 128K), input pricing ($4.00 vs $0.30/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Opus 5.5 and LongCat-Flash-Thinking?

Claude Opus 5.5 is developed by Anthropic and LongCat-Flash-Thinking is developed by Meituan.

Related comparisons