Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs WizardLM-2 8x22B

Claude Opus 4.6 has enough public results to be ranked (#20); WizardLM-2 8x22B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.6 Anthropic

58.2

Rank #20 Confirmed

WizardLM-2 8x22B Microsoft

31.4

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in 2 categories and WizardLM-2 8x22B in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Opus 4.6 leads 61.9 to 23.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 90.5% for Claude Opus 4.6 and 43.4% for WizardLM-2 8x22B.
  • WizardLM-2 8x22B is cheaper at $0.62 / $0.62 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.6.
  • Claude Opus 4.6 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 66K.
  • WizardLM-2 8x22B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.6WizardLM-2 8x22B
ProviderAnthropicMicrosoft
Noometry Index58.231.4
Released2026-02-042024-04-15
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M66K
Max output128K8K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.62
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.62
Results tracked682

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.2 (#20), WizardLM-2 8x22B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6WizardLM-2 8x22B
SWE-bench Verified78.7%—
FrontierCode26.6%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)75.6%—
LMArena WebDev1547—
SWE-bench Multilingual72%—
GSO41.2%—
WeirdML78%—
LMArena Coding1536—
ALE-Bench996.5—
AlgoTune1.47—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 51.1 (#4), WizardLM-2 8x22B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6WizardLM-2 8x22B
Terminal-Bench79.8%—
APEX-Agents46.3%—
Remote Labor Index4.2%—
τ²-bench Banking27.3%—
Cybench93%—
DeepResearch Bench55.3%—
GBAEval44.1%—
LMArena Search1253—
METR Time Horizons78.9%—
Vending-Bench 28,018—

Reasoning Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.8 (#23), WizardLM-2 8x22B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6WizardLM-2 8x22B
ARC-AGI-269.2%—
SimpleBench67.6%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)92.1%—
ARC-AGI-194%—
Chess Puzzles17%—
EnigmaEval7.6%—
Thematic Generalization80.6%—
EBR-Bench12.7%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1527—
Mystery Game Puzzles25%—
DTBench91.2%—
LMCA55.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index155.24—
ForecastBench60—

Math Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 63.0 (#31), WizardLM-2 8x22B: 28.9

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6WizardLM-2 8x22B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%—
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions78.5%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202594.4%—
ProofBench50%—
LMArena Math1519—
MATH Level 5—25.7%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)40.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 61.9 (#26), WizardLM-2 8x22B: 23.3

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6WizardLM-2 8x22B
GPQA Diamond90.5%43.4%
Humanity's Last Exam34.4%—
SimpleQA Verified47%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate12.2%—
LMArena Expert1546—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 37.3 (#74), WizardLM-2 8x22B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6WizardLM-2 8x22B
LMArena Vision1316—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1507—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.9 (#6), WizardLM-2 8x22B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6WizardLM-2 8x22B
LMArena Non-English1489—
LMArena Chinese1551—
LMArena French1513—
LMArena German1502—
LMArena Japanese1484—
LMArena Korean1464—
LMArena Russian1497—
LMArena Spanish1510—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 79.5 (#4), WizardLM-2 8x22B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6WizardLM-2 8x22B
LMArena Instruction Following1523—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 48.1 (#13), WizardLM-2 8x22B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6WizardLM-2 8x22B
CL-bench20.7%—
CL-bench Life17%—
LMArena Longer Query1520—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 73.5 (#10), WizardLM-2 8x22B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6WizardLM-2 8x22B
LMArena Text1503—
LMArena Creative Writing1505—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1809—
EQ-Bench 41223—
LMArena Multi-Turn1513—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than WizardLM-2 8x22B?

Claude Opus 4.6 has enough public results to be ranked (#20); WizardLM-2 8x22B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or WizardLM-2 8x22B?

WizardLM-2 8x22B is cheaper. It lists at $0.62 per million input tokens and $0.62 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.6 lists at $5 and $25.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.6 does, with 1M tokens against 66K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.6 and WizardLM-2 8x22B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.6 has 68 scored results on Noometry and WizardLM-2 8x22B has 2.

Related comparisons

Go deeper