For Developers/Models/Compare/Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-5.6

Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-5.6

Pricing, benchmarks, and use case comparison

Quick take

  • GPT-5.6 leads on 1 of 1 shared benchmarks, including Terminal-Bench 2.1 (88.8 vs 74.6%).

Specs comparison

Claude Opus 4.8GPT-5.6
ProviderAnthropicOpenAI
TypeClosed sourceClosed source
Context window1MNot announced
Input / 1M tokens$5.005
Output / 1M tokens$25.0030
Release date2026-052026-06

Benchmarks

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-5.6
SWE-bench Verified88.6%-
SWE-bench Pro69.2%-
Terminal-Bench 2.174.6%88.8
GPQA Diamond93.6%-
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index61.4-
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Sol)-88.8%
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Terra)-82.5%
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Luna)-84.3%
ExploitBench-Competitive with Anthropic Mythos Preview
ExploitGym-Significant improvements
GeneBench v1-Not announced

Scores sourced from official provider release posts and independent benchmark aggregators.

Which should you choose?

Choose Claude Opus 4.8 if...

  • You need top-tier autonomous coding and multi-step agentic reliability
  • You run long-horizon agent traces that previously derailed after compaction
  • You want enterprise-grade reasoning with 1M context and 128k output
  • You need throughput and are willing to pay fast-mode premium for 2.5x speed
Full Claude Opus 4.8 details →

Choose GPT-5.6 if...

  • You want to standardize on one model generation but route requests across cost/quality tiers
  • You are an approved preview partner exploring the newest OpenAI capabilities
  • Workloads spanning agentic coding, knowledge work, and research where tier flexibility helps
Full GPT-5.6 details →

Compare Claude Opus 4.8 with others