OpenAI o1 vs Claude 3 Opus
Head-to-head specifications
| Metric | OpenAI o1 | Claude 3 Opus | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU (general capability) | 92.3% | 86.8% | +5.5% |
| Context window | 128K tokens | 200K tokens | — |
| Price (input / output per 1M) | $15 / $60 | $15 / $75 | — |
| Access | Proprietary API | Proprietary API | — |
- OpenAI o1 leads general capability (MMLU 92.3% vs 86.8%).
- Claude 3 Opus offers the larger context window, useful for long documents and codebases.
Verdict: OpenAI o1 or Claude 3 Opus?
OpenAI o1 advantages
- General capability (+6%)
- Output cost (+20%)
Claude 3 Opus advantages
- Context window (+36%)
Which should you choose?
- Choose the OpenAI o1 if you need the strongest reasoning and accuracy.
- Choose the Claude 3 Opus if you work with long documents or large codebases.
- Choose the OpenAI o1 if you generate a lot of output and want the lowest cost.
Value for money
OpenAI o1 offers more capability per dollar — a better value pick for high-volume use, delivering 1.28× the MMLU-per-cost of the alternative.
OpenAI o1 vs Claude 3 Opus: which should you choose?
OpenAI o1 — OpenAI large language model (2024) with a 128K-token context window and an MMLU score of 92.3%.
Claude 3 Opus — Anthropic large language model (2024) with a 200K-token context window and an MMLU score of 86.8%.
OpenAI o1 vs Claude 3 Opus: OpenAI o1 scores higher on the MMLU benchmark. OpenAI o1 leads general capability (MMLU 92.3% vs 86.8%). Claude 3 Opus offers the larger context window, useful for long documents and codebases.
Capability and reasoning
On MMLU — a 57-subject benchmark of general knowledge and reasoning — the OpenAI o1 scores 92.3% versus 86.8%. MMLU is a useful proxy for raw knowledge but does not capture instruction-following, coding, tool use, latency or safety, so treat it as one signal among several.
Context window
The Claude 3 Opus handles up to 200K tokens per request, which sets how much documentation, transcript or code it can reason over at once — decisive for retrieval-augmented and long-document workflows.
Pricing and access
OpenAI o1 is proprietary api and Claude 3 Opus is proprietary api. Proprietary models bill per token via API; open-weight models can be self-hosted, trading per-call cost for infrastructure you manage. For production, weigh throughput, rate limits and data-residency needs alongside headline price.
The verdict
Both are credible choices in the ai model comparison space; the specification table above lays out every metric so you can weigh the trade-offs that matter to you. Pick the one whose strengths line up with how you will actually use it.
Frequently asked questions
Is the OpenAI o1 better than the Claude 3 Opus?
OpenAI o1 takes the overall edge, though Claude 3 Opus wins in specific areas worth weighing. OpenAI o1 leads general capability (MMLU 92.3% vs 86.8%).
What is the main difference between the OpenAI o1 and the Claude 3 Opus?
OpenAI o1 leads general capability (MMLU 92.3% vs 86.8%). Claude 3 Opus offers the larger context window, useful for long documents and codebases.
Which is better value?
OpenAI o1 offers more capability per dollar — a better value pick for high-volume use, delivering 1.28× the MMLU-per-cost of the alternative.
Which should I choose?
Choose the OpenAI o1 if you need the strongest reasoning and accuracy. Choose the Claude 3 Opus if you work with long documents or large codebases.
Methodology
Large language models are compared on the MMLU benchmark (a widely-cited 57-subject test of general knowledge and reasoning, reported as a percentage), maximum context window, and published API pricing per million input and output tokens. Open-weight models can also be self-hosted. Benchmarks capture only part of real-world quality, which also depends on tool use, latency, safety and task fit.