Model comparison
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Magistral Medium
Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 35.2 on the Noometry Index. Magistral Medium costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 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 5.5 leads 80.2 to 8.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-2: 93.3% for Claude Opus 5.5 and 0% for Magistral Medium.
- Magistral Medium is cheaper at $2 / $5 per million input/output tokens, against $4 / $20 for Claude Opus 5.5.
- Claude Opus 5.5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
- Magistral Medium has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 5.5 | Magistral Medium | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 68.6 | 35.2 |
| Released | 2026-09-22 | 2025-03-17 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 262K |
| Max output | 128K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $4 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $20 | $5 |
| Results tracked | 44 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 71.9 (#3), Magistral Medium: 39.1 (#161)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 66.9% | 39.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1547 | 1319 |
| FrontierCode | 54.6% | — |
| CursorBench | 57.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1813 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 62.3% | — |
| MirrorCode | 77.4% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 2,147 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15), Magistral Medium: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 73.5% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 30.6% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 9,235 | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), Magistral Medium: 8.6 (#348)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 93.3% | 0% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98.5% | 6.1% |
| CritPt | 31.7% | 0.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1535 | 1267 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 16.2% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 88.5% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 71.4% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 71% | — |
| DTBench | 98.9% | — |
| LMCA | 68.2% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 167.33 | — |
Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3), Magistral Medium: 35.1 (#189)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1506 | 1250 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 91.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 95% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 2.9% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10), Magistral Medium: 33.5 (#202)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1547 | 1223 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.6% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 72.2% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), Magistral Medium: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1321 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 51.2% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 83.3% | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), Magistral Medium: 39.6 (#224)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1507 | 1232 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1588 | 1227 |
| LMArena French | 1514 | 1267 |
| LMArena Russian | 1520 | 1224 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1507 | 1271 |
| LMArena German | — | 1248 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1175 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1125 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), Magistral Medium: 66.0 (#211)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1537 | 1254 |
Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), Magistral Medium: 39.3 (#183)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1532 | 1295 |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), Magistral Medium: 46.3 (#219)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1515 | 1255 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1533 | 1245 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1499 | 1275 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2050 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Magistral Medium?
Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 35.2 on the Noometry Index. Magistral Medium costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Magistral Medium?
Magistral Medium is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $5 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5.5 lists at $4 and $20.
Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Magistral Medium better for coding?
Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.9 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Opus 5.5 does, with 1M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Magistral Medium share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Magistral Medium has 22.