For Developers/Models/Compare/Claude Opus 4.8 vs o1

Claude Opus 4.8 vs o1

Pricing, benchmarks, and use case comparison

Quick take

  • Claude Opus 4.8 leads on 1 of 1 shared benchmarks, including GPQA Diamond (93.6% vs 77.3%).
  • Claude Opus 4.8 is meaningfully stronger at speed (68 vs 30 on our capability index).
  • Claude Opus 4.8 is 67% cheaper on input tokens, which compounds fast on high-volume or agentic workloads.
  • Claude Opus 4.8 has a 1M context window vs 200,000 tokens (100,000 max output) - better for whole-repo or long-document work.

Specs comparison

Claude Opus 4.8o1
ProviderAnthropicOpenAI
TypeClosed sourceClosed source
Context window1M200,000 tokens (100,000 max output)
Input / 1M tokens$5.00$15.00
Output / 1M tokens$25.00$60.00
Release date2026-052024-12

Benchmarks

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8o1
SWE-bench Verified88.6%-
SWE-bench Pro69.2%-
Terminal-Bench 2.174.6%-
GPQA Diamond93.6%77.3%
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index61.4-
AIME 2024-74%
Codeforces-~89th percentile

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 o1 if...

  • Hard, multi-step math, science, and logic problems that reward deliberate reasoning
  • Competitive programming and algorithmic problem solving
  • Existing o1-based pipelines already validated for reasoning tasks
Full o1 details →

Compare Claude Opus 4.8 with others