Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.1 vs o1
Claude Opus 4.1 and o1 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (41.0 vs 40.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 34 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 34 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 6 categories and o1 in 4 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where o1 leads 36.1 to 22.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Cybench: 42% for Claude Opus 4.1 and 10% for o1.
- o1 is cheaper at $15 / $60 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.1.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.1 | o1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 41.0 | 40.9 |
| Released | 2025-08-05 | 2024-09-12 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | 200K |
| Max output | 32K | 100K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $15 | $15 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $75 | $60 |
| Results tracked | 48 | 52 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding o1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 44.4 (#73), o1: 46.1 (#70)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 45.9% | 47.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1479 | 1367 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 61.7% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1390 | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 69.7% |
| CadEval | — | 56% |
| ALE-Bench | 674.77 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.34 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 89% |
| MBPP+ | — | 80.2% |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 35.0 (#41), o1: 24.6 (#117)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 42% | 10% |
| METR Time Horizons | 66.8% | 51.1% |
| Terminal-Bench | 38% | — |
| GDPval | 43.6% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 48.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1148 | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 32.2 (#76), o1: 27.9 (#111)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 60% | 41.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | 7% | 15% |
| EnigmaEval | 7.2% | 5.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1371 |
| DTBench | 80% | 74.7% |
| LMCA | 37.1% | 22.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.12 | 141.91 |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 30.7% |
| EBR-Bench | 7.9% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 91.6% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 21% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65.5% |
| ForecastBench | 62 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 75.7% |
Math o1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 22.3 (#277), o1: 36.1 (#175)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 12.6% | 14.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 68.9% | 73.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1431 | 1388 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 7.2% | 9.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 80.3% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 94.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
Claude Opus 4.1: 42.0 (#101), o1: 41.5 (#110)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 77.3% | 76.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 11.5% | 8% |
| Confabulations | 17.1% | 11.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1361 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 41.1% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | — |
Multimodal o1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 26.8 (#119), o1: 34.2 (#93)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| VPCT | 35% | 37% |
| LMArena Vision | — | 1168 |
| GeoBench | — | 80% |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 41.4% |
Multilingual Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 52.0 (#95), o1: 48.6 (#142)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 1358 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1427 | 1394 |
| LMArena French | 1431 | 1344 |
| LMArena German | 1413 | 1337 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1378 | 1346 |
| LMArena Korean | 1380 | 1396 |
| LMArena Russian | 1422 | 1356 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | 1345 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Claude Opus 4.1: 75.6 (#58), o1: 74.8 (#86)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1435 | 1367 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.5% |
Long Context o1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#63), o1: 50.3 (#9)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1378 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 62.4 (#74), o1: 55.6 (#144)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1366 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1412 | 1348 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.7% | 70.2% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1444 | 1369 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 65.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than o1?
Claude Opus 4.1 and o1 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (41.0 vs 40.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or o1?
o1 is cheaper. It lists at $15 per million input tokens and $60 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.
Is Claude Opus 4.1 or o1 better for coding?
o1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.1 versus 44.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 200K tokens.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and o1 share?
34 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and o1 has 52.