Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude 3 Opus vs K-Exaone

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 4 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

Anthropic
40.99/100
Margin
7.3pts
winning →
LG AI Research
48.32/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude 3 Opus #166 (Supported); K-Exaone #123 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude 3 Opus and K-Exaone share 4 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Claude 3 Opus; 8 to K-Exaone.

Updated July 17, 2026
Shared results
4
Claude 3 Opus only
1
K-Exaone only
8
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Claude 3 Opus and K-Exaone is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 4 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

K-Exaone has the larger context window at 256K, compared with 200K for Claude 3 Opus.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude 3 OpusK-ExaoneComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude 3 Opus$15 input / $75 outputK-ExaoneNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude 3 OpusNot availableK-ExaoneNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude 3 OpusNot availableK-ExaoneNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude 3 Opus200KK-Exaone256KK-Exaone lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusK-ExaoneResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 74.3%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusK-ExaoneResult
AA Coding IndexSource 19.5%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 23.3%35.6%K-Exaone leads
Terminal-Bench HardSource 22.7%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusK-ExaoneResult
AA-LCRSource 55.7%Not comparable
CritPtSource 1.1%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusK-ExaoneResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 11.8%24.7%K-Exaone leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 48.9%78.3%K-Exaone leads
AA-HLESource 3.1%13.1%K-Exaone leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -57.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 16.5%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 89.1%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude 3 OpusK-ExaoneResult
AA-IFBenchSource 64.7%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Claude 3 Opus and K-Exaone on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for Claude 3 Opus and K-Exaone today?

Claude 3 Opus: $15.00 input / $75.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 17, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.