Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking vs Llama 3.1 405B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 8 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

36.55/100
Margin
15.2pts
winning →
51.71/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking #184 (Supported); Llama 3.1 405B #102 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and Llama 3.1 405B share 8 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking; 3 to Llama 3.1 405B.

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
8
Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking only
1
Llama 3.1 405B only
3
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and Llama 3.1 405B is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 8 shared benchmark results across 5 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.

Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking has the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for Llama 3.1 405B.

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 4.1 Opus ThinkingLlama 3.1 405BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingNot availableLlama 3.1 405B$0 input / $0 outputA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude 4.1 Opus Thinking29 tok/sLlama 3.1 405B29 tok/sMeasured throughput is equal.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude 4.1 Opus Thinking15.00 sLlama 3.1 405B2.19 sLlama 3.1 405B reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude 4.1 Opus Thinking200KLlama 3.1 405B128KClaude 4.1 Opus Thinking lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingLlama 3.1 405BResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 71.4%19%Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking leads
Coding
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingLlama 3.1 405BResult
AA-SciCodeSource 40.9%29.9%Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking leads
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingLlama 3.1 405BResult
AA-LCRSource 66.3%24.3%Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking leads
CritPtSource 0.0%0.0%Tie
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingLlama 3.1 405BResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 33.7%8.5%Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 80.9%51.5%Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking leads
AA-HLESource 11.9%4.2%Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -17.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 22.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 51.0%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingLlama 3.1 405BResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 67.9%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingLlama 3.1 405BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 55.4%39.0%Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and Llama 3.1 405B 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 4.1 Opus Thinking and Llama 3.1 405B today?

Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking: Pricing unavailable Llama 3.1 405B: $0.00 input / $0.00 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 20, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.