Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Claude Opus 4.6
91
GPT-5.3 Codex
89
Verified leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.6 #3 · GPT-5.3 Codex unranked
Pick Claude Opus 4.6 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.3 Codex only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Agentic
+1.1 difference
Coding
+1.3 difference
Claude Opus 4.6
GPT-5.3 Codex
$5 / $25
$2.5 / $10
40 t/s
79 t/s
1.78s
88.26s
1M
400K
Pick Claude Opus 4.6 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.3 Codex only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Claude Opus 4.6 has the cleaner provisional overall profile here, landing at 91 versus 89. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Claude Opus 4.6's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 64.4 against 63.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 65.4% to 77.3%.
Claude Opus 4.6 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $2.50 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens for GPT-5.3 Codex. That is roughly 2.5x on output cost alone. GPT-5.3 Codex is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Opus 4.6 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. Claude Opus 4.6 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 400K for GPT-5.3 Codex.
Claude Opus 4.6 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 91 to 89. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 65.4% and 77.3%.
Claude Opus 4.6 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 64.4 versus 63.1. Inside this category, SWE-Rebench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Claude Opus 4.6 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 72.6 versus 71.5. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.