Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs Magistral Medium

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 35.2 on the Noometry Index. Magistral Medium costs 3.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.5 Anthropic

50.5

Rank #47 Confirmed

Magistral Medium Mistral AI

35.2

Rank #227 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Magistral Medium in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.5 leads 42.6 to 8.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 80% for Claude Opus 4.5 and 6.1% for Magistral Medium.
  • Magistral Medium is cheaper at $2 / $5 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.5.
  • Magistral Medium accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 200K.
  • Magistral Medium has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.5Magistral Medium
ProviderAnthropicMistral AI
Noometry Index50.535.2
Released2025-11-012025-03-17
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K262K
Max output64K16K
Input $ / M tokens$5$2
Output $ / M tokens$25$5
Results tracked6922

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.8 (#27), Magistral Medium: 39.1 (#161)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Medium
LMArena Coding15041319
SWE-bench Verified76.7%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)76.8%—
LMArena WebDev1494—
SWE-bench Multilingual70.7%—
SciCode—39.2%
GSO26.5%—
WeirdML63.7%—
ALE-Bench1,025—
AlgoTune1.77—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 47.3 (#12), Magistral Medium: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Medium
Terminal-Bench63.1%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard77.5%—
GDPval45.5%—
Remote Labor Index3.8%—
τ²-bench Airline84%—
τ²-bench Banking24.7%—
τ²-bench Retail79.6%—
τ²-bench Telecom92.3%—
Cybench82%—
DeepResearch Bench54.8%—
OSWorld66.3%—
BALROG43.5%—
LMArena Search1180—
METR Time Horizons75%—
Vending-Bench 24,967—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 42.6 (#51), Magistral Medium: 8.6 (#348)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Medium
ARC-AGI-237.6%0%
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.2%16.2%
ARC-AGI-180%6.1%
LMArena Hard Prompts14761267
SimpleBench62%—
NYT Connections (extended)52.5%—
CritPt—0.3%
Chess Puzzles12%—
EnigmaEval11.9%—
EBR-Bench14.3%—
Mystery Game Puzzles22%—
DTBench89.9%—
LMCA44.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index150.09—
ForecastBench60.7—

Math Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 38.6 (#132), Magistral Medium: 35.1 (#189)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Medium
LMArena Math14631250
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)34.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.1%—
ProofBench36%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)20.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 56.5 (#44), Magistral Medium: 33.5 (#202)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Medium
LMArena Expert14871223
GPQA Diamond86%—
Humanity's Last Exam25.2%—
SimpleQA Verified45.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 31.4 (#107), Magistral Medium: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Medium
GeoBench75%—
VPCT40%—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1462—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.3 (#47), Magistral Medium: 39.6 (#224)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Medium
LMArena Non-English14381232
LMArena Chinese14701227
LMArena French14711267
LMArena German14491248
LMArena Japanese14161175
LMArena Korean14241125
LMArena Russian14471224
LMArena Spanish14581271

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 77.5 (#19), Magistral Medium: 66.0 (#211)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Medium
LMArena Instruction Following14781254

Long Context Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 46.5 (#22), Magistral Medium: 39.3 (#183)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Medium
LMArena Longer Query14801295
CL-bench21.1%—

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 68.1 (#28), Magistral Medium: 46.3 (#219)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Magistral Medium
LMArena Text14511255
LMArena Creative Writing14451245
LMArena Multi-Turn14661275
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1687—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than Magistral Medium?

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 35.2 on the Noometry Index. Magistral Medium costs 3.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.5 or Magistral Medium?

Magistral Medium is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $5 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.5 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.5 or Magistral Medium better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 54.8 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Magistral Medium does, with 262K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.5 and Magistral Medium share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and Magistral Medium has 22.

Related comparisons

Go deeper