Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs o1-pro

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

63.43/100
Margin
18.4pts
← winning
OpenAI
45.03/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 #38 (Supported); o1-pro #148 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.5 and o1-pro share 2 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 57 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.5; 0 to o1-pro.

Updated July 24, 2026
Shared results
2
Claude Opus 4.5 only
57
o1-pro only
0
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Claude Opus 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. o1-pro only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 1 evidence category; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Claude Opus 4.5 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 63.43 to 45.03. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

o1-pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $150.00 input / $600.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens for Claude Opus 4.5. That is roughly 24.0x on output cost alone. o1-pro is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Opus 4.5 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 scores and score margins for Claude Opus 4.5 and o1-pro
CategoryClaude Opus 4.5Δo1-pro
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.558.1Margin 20.9o1-pro79.0
AgenticClaude Opus 4.562.6MarginNo overlapo1-proNot measured
CodingClaude Opus 4.571.7MarginNo overlapo1-proNot measured
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.564.4MarginNo overlapo1-proNot measured
MathClaude Opus 4.557.5MarginNo overlapo1-proNot measured
MultilingualClaude Opus 4.585.7MarginNo overlapo1-proNot measured
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.569.9MarginNo overlapo1-proNot measured
Inst. FollowingClaude Opus 4.569.5MarginNo overlapo1-proNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude Opus 4.5B · o1-pro
  1. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 87%B 79%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.5Δ 8
    GPQA: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 87%; o1-pro scored 79%. Claude Opus 4.5 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricClaude Opus 4.5o1-proComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.5$5 input / $25 outputo1-pro$150 input / $600 outputClaude Opus 4.5 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.546 tok/so1-proNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.51.01 so1-proNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.5200Ko1-pro200KListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5o1-proResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 59.3%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 66.3%Not comparable
OSWorldSource 66.3%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 59.6%Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource 52.3%Not comparable
τ³-bench resultsSource 70.2%Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource 23.3%Not comparable
DeepPlanningSource 26.4%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 43.5%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 42.3%Not comparable
MCP-TasksSource 71.8%Not comparable
WideResearchSource 76.4%Not comparable
CyberGymSource 50.6%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 86.3%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 64.23%Not comparable
JobBenchSource 32.3%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5o1-proResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 80.9%Not comparable
LiveCodeBench v6Source 84.8%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 57.1%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 77.5%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource 43.2%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 47.0%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5o1-proResult
LongBench v2Source 64.4%Not comparable
AI-NeedleSource 74%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 65.3%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.3%Not comparable
Knowledgeo1-pro wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5o1-proResult
GPQASource 87%79%Claude Opus 4.5 leads
SuperGPQASource 70.6%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 89.5%Not comparable
MMLU-ReduxSource 96.6%Not comparable
C-EvalSource 92.2%Not comparable
HLESource 30.8%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 34.7%18.9%Claude Opus 4.5 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 81.0%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 12.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -3.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 40.7%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 75.4%Not comparable
AA MMLU-ProSource 88.9%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5o1-proResult
AIME26Source 95.1%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2025Source 92.9%Not comparable
HMMT Nov 2025Source 93.3%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 85.3%Not comparable
MMAnswerBenchSource 84.0%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 20.690%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 4.167%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5o1-proResult
MMLU-ProXSource 85.7%Not comparable
NOVA-63Source 56.7%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5o1-proResult
MMMU-ProSource 70.6%Not comparable
MathVisionSource 74.3%Not comparable
CharXivSource 68.5%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource 84.4%Not comparable
ScreenSpot ProSource 45.7%Not comparable
V*Source 67.0%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 71.2%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1277Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5o1-proResult
IFEvalSource 90.9%Not comparable
IFBenchSource 58%Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource 43.0%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.5 or o1-pro?

Claude Opus 4.5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 63.43 to 45.03. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 87% and 79%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or o1-pro?

o1-pro has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 79 versus 58.1. Inside this category, Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 24, 2026