Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Claude Opus 4.6
84
Winner · 2/8 categoriesGranite-4.0-H-350M
~24
0/8 categoriesClaude Opus 4.6· Granite-4.0-H-350M
Pick Claude Opus 4.6 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Granite-4.0-H-350M only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
Claude Opus 4.6 is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 84 to 24. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Opus 4.6's sharpest advantage is in multilingual, where it averages 96 against 14.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is MGSM, 96% to 14.7%.
Claude Opus 4.6 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $15.00 input / $75.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Granite-4.0-H-350M. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Claude Opus 4.6 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 32K for Granite-4.0-H-350M.
BenchLM keeps the benchmark table and the operator tradeoffs on the same page so a better score does not hide a materially slower, pricier, or smaller-context model.
Runtime metrics show N/A when BenchLM does not have a sourced snapshot for that exact model. The scoring rules and freshness policy are documented on the methodology page.
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Granite-4.0-H-350M |
|---|---|---|
| Agentic | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 65.4% | — |
| BrowseComp | 84% | — |
| Coding | ||
| SWE-bench Verified | 80.8% | — |
| LiveCodeBench | 76% | — |
| FLTEval | 39.6% | — |
| SWE-Rebench | 65.3% | — |
| React Native Evals | 84.4% | — |
| HumanEval | — | 39% |
| Multimodal & Grounded | ||
| MMMU-Pro | 77.3% | — |
| OfficeQA Pro | 94% | — |
| Reasoning | ||
| MuSR | 93% | — |
| BBH | 94% | 33.1% |
| LongBench v2 | 92% | — |
| MRCRv2 | 76% | — |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 68.8% | — |
| KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.6 wins | ||
| MMLU | 99% | 35.0% |
| GPQA | 91.3% | 24.1% |
| SuperGPQA | 95% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 82% | 12.1% |
| HLE | 53% | — |
| FrontierScience | 88% | — |
| SimpleQA | 72% | — |
| Instruction Following | ||
| IFEval | — | 55.4% |
| MultilingualClaude Opus 4.6 wins | ||
| MGSM | 96% | 14.7% |
| Mathematics | ||
| AIME 2023 | 99% | — |
| AIME 2024 | 99% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 98% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2023 | 95% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2024 | 97% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | 96% | — |
| BRUMO 2025 | 96% | — |
| MATH-500 | 98% | — |
Claude Opus 4.6 is ahead overall, 84 to 24. The biggest single separator in this matchup is MGSM, where the scores are 96% and 14.7%.
Claude Opus 4.6 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.8 versus 16.4. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Claude Opus 4.6 has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 96 versus 14.7. Inside this category, MGSM is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.