Model comparison
Claude 4.1 Opus vs o3-mini
Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4.1 Opus #149 (Supported); o3-mini #141 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude 4.1 Opus and o3-mini share 2 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to Claude 4.1 Opus; 8 to o3-mini.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 2
- Claude 4.1 Opus only
- 2
- o3-mini only
- 8
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick o3-mini if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 4.1 Opus only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
o3-mini has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 46.59 versus 44.8. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Claude 4.1 Opus is also the more expensive model on tokens at $15.00 input / $75.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.10 input / $4.40 output per 1M tokens for o3-mini. That is roughly 17.0x on output cost alone. o3-mini is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude 4.1 Opus is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude 4.1 Opus | Δ | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Claude 4.1 Opus74.5 | Margin← 25.2 | o3-mini49.3 |
| Knowledge | Claude 4.1 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | o3-mini77.2 |
| Inst. Following | Claude 4.1 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | o3-mini93.9 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 74.5%B 49.3%Winner: Claude 4.1 OpusΔ 25.2SWE-bench Verified: Claude 4.1 Opus scored 74.5%; o3-mini scored 49.3%. Claude 4.1 Opus wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude 4.1 Opus | o3-mini | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude 4.1 Opus$15 input / $75 output | o3-mini$1.1 input / $4.4 output | o3-mini has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude 4.1 Opus29 tok/s | o3-mini160 tok/s | o3-mini has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude 4.1 Opus1.66 s | o3-mini7.12 s | Claude 4.1 Opus reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude 4.1 Opus200K | o3-mini200K | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic2 benchmarks
CodingClaude 4.1 Opus wins2 benchmarks
Knowledge5 benchmarks
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | o3-mini | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME 2024Source | — | 87.3% | Not comparable |
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | o3-mini | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1207 | — | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | o3-mini | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFEvalSource | — | 93.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude 4.1 Opus or o3-mini?
o3-mini is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 46.59 to 44.8. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 74.5% and 49.3%.
Which is better for coding, Claude 4.1 Opus or o3-mini?
Claude 4.1 Opus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 74.5 versus 49.3. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.