Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Claude Opus 4.6
84
Winner · 0/8 categoriesHolo3-35B-A3B
~78
1/8 categoriesClaude Opus 4.6· Holo3-35B-A3B
Pick Claude Opus 4.6 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Holo3-35B-A3B only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Claude Opus 4.6 is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 84 to 78. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Opus 4.6 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $15.00 input / $75.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.25 input / $1.80 output per 1M tokens for Holo3-35B-A3B. That is roughly 41.7x on output cost alone. Claude Opus 4.6 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 64K for Holo3-35B-A3B.
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 | Holo3-35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| AgenticHolo3-35B-A3B wins | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 65.4% | — |
| BrowseComp | 84% | — |
| OSWorld-Verified | — | 77.8% |
| Coding | ||
| SWE-bench Verified | 80.8% | — |
| LiveCodeBench | 76% | — |
| FLTEval | 39.6% | — |
| SWE-Rebench | 65.3% | — |
| React Native Evals | 84.4% | — |
| Multimodal & Grounded | ||
| MMMU-Pro | 77.3% | — |
| OfficeQA Pro | 94% | — |
| Reasoning | ||
| MuSR | 93% | — |
| BBH | 94% | — |
| LongBench v2 | 92% | — |
| MRCRv2 | 76% | — |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 68.8% | — |
| Knowledge | ||
| MMLU | 99% | — |
| GPQA | 91.3% | — |
| SuperGPQA | 95% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 82% | — |
| HLE | 53% | — |
| FrontierScience | 88% | — |
| SimpleQA | 72% | — |
| Instruction Following | ||
| Coming soon | ||
| Multilingual | ||
| MGSM | 96% | — |
| 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 78.
Holo3-35B-A3B has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.8 versus 72.6. Claude Opus 4.6 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
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.