Coding
Like-for-like- Claude 4.1 Opus
- 74.5
- Hy3 Preview
- 74.4
- Weighted basis
- 1 vs 1 rows
- Reading
- Claude 4.1 Opus leads
Model comparison
Claude 4.1 Opus vs Hy3 Preview
Updated August 7, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.
Claude 4.1 Opus has the higher public score estimate, 44.67 versus 42.8, but the 90% score intervals overlap. Treat that as a lead, not a settled winner.
1 results are shared. Category rows based on different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
Which one for your work
Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.
Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Claude 4.1 Opus
Claude 4.1 Opus leads on the same 1 weighted benchmark row.
Confidence: limited
Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
Hy3 Preview
Hy3 Preview has the larger documented context window.
Confidence: documented
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.
Confidence: limited
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. Claude 4.1 Opus does not fit this workload in one request. Claude 4.1 Opus has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Hy3 Preview has no comparable published API token rate.
Confidence: rate-fallback
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
1 Claude 4.1 Opus only
1 Shared
5 Hy3 Preview only
- Shared results
- 1
- Claude 4.1 Opus only
- 1
- Hy3 Preview only
- 5
- Like-for-like categories
- 1 / 8
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row states whether both averages use the same weighted benchmark set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner in this template.
Agentic
Not comparable- Claude 4.1 Opus
- Not measured
- Hy3 Preview
- 54.4
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 1 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Reasoning
Not comparable- Claude 4.1 Opus
- Not measured
- Hy3 Preview
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Knowledge
Not comparable- Claude 4.1 Opus
- Not measured
- Hy3 Preview
- 87.2
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 1 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- Claude 4.1 Opus
- Not measured
- Hy3 Preview
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Claude 4.1 Opus
- Not measured
- Hy3 Preview
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- Claude 4.1 Opus
- Not measured
- Hy3 Preview
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Instruction following
Not comparable- Claude 4.1 Opus
- Not measured
- Hy3 Preview
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Claude 4.1 Opus | Hy3 Preview | Weighted basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 74.5 | 74.4 | Like-for-like1 vs 1 rows | Claude 4.1 Opus leads |
| Agentic | Not measured | 54.4 | Not comparable0 vs 1 rows | Not comparable |
| Reasoning | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Knowledge | Not measured | 87.2 | Not comparable0 vs 1 rows | Not comparable |
| Math | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
Shape of the matched evidence
Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.
Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.
SWE-bench Verified
Coding
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.
Chat turn
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
- Claude 4.1 Opus
- $0.0525
- Fits in one request
- Hy3 Preview
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
Hy3 Preview has no comparable published API token rate.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- Claude 4.1 Opus
- $0.975
- Fits in one request
- Hy3 Preview
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
Hy3 Preview has no comparable published API token rate.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- Claude 4.1 Opus
- $4.05
- Does not fit in one request
- Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
- Hy3 Preview
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
- Cached-input rate unavailable
Claude 4.1 Opus does not fit this workload in one request. Claude 4.1 Opus has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Hy3 Preview has no comparable published API token rate.
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationClaude 4.1 OpusHy3 Preview
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Claude 4.1 Opus
200K
Hy3 Preview
256K
API model ID
Claude 4.1 Opus
Not sourced
Hy3 Preview
Not sourced
Cached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
Claude 4.1 Opus
Not published
Hy3 Preview
No comparable hosted API rate
Documented inputs
Claude 4.1 Opus
Not sourced
Hy3 Preview
Not sourced
Documented outputs
Claude 4.1 Opus
Not sourced
Hy3 Preview
Not sourced
Provider availability
Claude 4.1 Opus
Not sourced
Hy3 Preview
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
Claude 4.1 Opus
Non-Reasoning
Hy3 Preview
Reasoning
Weight access
Claude 4.1 Opus
Proprietary
Hy3 Preview
Open Weight
License
Claude 4.1 Opus
Proprietary
Hy3 Preview
Open Weight
Release date
Claude 4.1 Opus
2025-08-01
Hy3 Preview
2026-04-23
If you already use one of these models
- Deployment change
- The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
- Quality signal
- Claude 4.1 Opus has the higher public score estimate, 44.67 versus 42.8, but the 90% score intervals overlap.
- Workload cost
- A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
- Context tradeoff
- Hy3 Preview has the larger documented window (256K).
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence7 rows
Agentic
Coding
Knowledge
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Claude 4.1 Opus or Hy3 Preview?
Claude 4.1 Opus has the higher public score estimate, 44.67 versus 42.8, but the 90% score intervals overlap. The higher estimate is not a decisive winner because the uncertainty ranges overlap.
Which is better for coding, Claude 4.1 Opus or Hy3 Preview?
Claude 4.1 Opus leads the like-for-like coding comparison across 1 shared weighted benchmark row.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude 4.1 Opus or Hy3 Preview?
The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted agentic tasks basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a agentic tasks winner.
Which costs less, Claude 4.1 Opus or Hy3 Preview?
Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.
Which has the larger context window, Claude 4.1 Opus or Hy3 Preview?
Hy3 Preview has the larger documented context window: 256K, compared with 200K.
Related comparisons
Last updated August 7, 2026
Watch Claude 4.1 Opus vs Hy3 Preview
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.