Model comparison
Claude Opus 5 vs o1-mini
Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.8 to 34.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5 scores higher in 9 categories and o1-mini in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 5 leads 77.2 to 8.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-2: 90.4% for Claude Opus 5 and 0.8% for o1-mini.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 5 | o1-mini | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 67.8 | 34.0 |
| Released | 2026-07-24 | 2024-09-12 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | — |
| Results tracked | 57 | 39 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 67.5 (#5), o1-mini: 35.5 (#224)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 91.8% | 36.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1534 | 1362 |
| DeepSWE | 73.6% | — |
| FrontierCode | 53.4% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 32.9% |
| CursorBench | 46.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1691 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 52% | — |
| SciCode | 56.4% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 48% |
| ALE-Bench | 2,165 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 89% |
| MBPP+ | — | 78.8% |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 55.6 (#1), o1-mini: 24.6 (#118)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 65.8% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 31.4% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 48.7% | — |
| Cybench | — | 10% |
| PostTrainBench | 35% | — |
| BALROG | 63.4% | — |
| GBAEval | 79.6% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 24% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 11,182 | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 77.2 (#4), o1-mini: 8.8 (#346)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 90.4% | 0.8% |
| SimpleBench | 80.6% | 18.1% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | 14% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1526 | 1333 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 162.78 | 135.82 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 94.3% | — |
| CritPt | 29.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 42% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 45.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 72.3% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 59% | — |
| DTBench | 97.9% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 57.9% |
| LMCA | 64.5% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.12 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 57.8% |
Math Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 86.2 (#8), o1-mini: 35.4 (#186)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.9% | 46.9% |
| LMArena Math | 1531 | 1358 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 85.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 73.2% | — |
| ProofBench | 99% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 62% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 89.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1.7% |
Knowledge Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 66.8 (#9), o1-mini: 34.9 (#192)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 93.9% | 62.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1557 | 1316 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 59.9% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 18.6% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 5: 50.8 (#8), o1-mini: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1319 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 30.4% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 60.8% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1516 | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 58.8 (#4), o1-mini: 43.6 (#182)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1501 | 1289 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1574 | 1314 |
| LMArena French | 1519 | 1293 |
| LMArena German | 1524 | 1278 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1516 | 1245 |
| LMArena Korean | 1521 | 1223 |
| LMArena Russian | 1507 | 1283 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1519 | 1303 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 79.2 (#7), o1-mini: 66.7 (#206)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1517 | 1304 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 65.4% |
Long Context Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 46.5 (#21), o1-mini: 40.1 (#161)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1515 | 1320 |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Opus 5: 79.2 (#1), o1-mini: 48.4 (#202)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1507 | 1317 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1491 | 1244 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1499 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 64.9% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2133 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1385 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 40.9% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 5 better than o1-mini?
Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.8 to 34.0 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Opus 5 or o1-mini better for coding?
Claude Opus 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 67.5 versus 35.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5 and o1-mini share?
24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5 has 57 scored results on Noometry and o1-mini has 39.