The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Opus 5.5 vs MAI-Thinking-1

Claude Opus 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 60.3 to 33.0.

Anthropic · Microsoft · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Opus 5.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 60.3 to 33.0, ranking #1 overall.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Opus 5.5 wins 2; 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 5.5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 60.3 and ranks #1 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose MAI-Thinking-1

  • you are already invested in the Microsoft ecosystem

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Opus 5.5
Anthropic
MAI-Thinking-1
Microsoft
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
60.3
#1
33.0
#110
Reasoning
58.4
#1
33.8
#101
Coding
51.4
#1
19.2
#115
Agents
45.7
#2
12.6
#106
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 2
0 of 2
Input price
$4.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$20.00 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Claude Opus 5.5
MAI-Thinking-1
Math
42.7#4
33.7#54
Tool use
32.2#3
10.7#125
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

31 reported for Claude Opus 5.5 · 23 for MAI-Thinking-1

2 shared

Claude Opus 5.5 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (HealthBench Professional, SWE-Bench Pro), while MAI-Thinking-1 is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri Oct 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 5.5 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Claude Opus 5.5 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Opus 5.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Microsoft
MAI-Thinking-1
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Oct 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Opus 5.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas MAI-Thinking-1 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

MAI-Thinking-1

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 Opus 5.5

Proprietary

Closed source

MAI-Thinking-1

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 5.5 was released on 2026-09-22, while MAI-Thinking-1 was released on 2026-06-02.

Claude Opus 5.5 is 4 months newer than MAI-Thinking-1.

Claude Opus 5.5

Sep 22, 2026

1 weeks ago

3mo newer
MAI-Thinking-1

Jun 2, 2026

4 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Opus 5.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while MAI-Thinking-1'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 MAI-Thinking-1's cutoff date.

Claude Opus 5.5

Jun 2026

MAI-Thinking-1

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Opus 5.5 and MAI-Thinking-1 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Opus 5.5
✓ Preferred
MAI-Thinking-1
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 5.5 vs MAI-Thinking-1.

Which is better, Claude Opus 5.5 or MAI-Thinking-1?

Claude Opus 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 60.3 to 33.0. Claude Opus 5.5 is made by Anthropic and MAI-Thinking-1 is made by Microsoft. 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 MAI-Thinking-1 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%. MAI-Thinking-1 scores LongFact: 98.0%, AIME 2025: 97.0%, AIME 2026: 94.5%, GraphWalks: 90.0%, AIR-Bench: 88.0%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Opus 5.5 and MAI-Thinking-1?

Claude Opus 5.5 supports 1.0M tokens and MAI-Thinking-1 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 5.5 and MAI-Thinking-1?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (60.3 vs 33.0), multimodal support (yes vs no). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Opus 5.5 and MAI-Thinking-1?

Claude Opus 5.5 is developed by Anthropic and MAI-Thinking-1 is developed by Microsoft.

Related comparisons