UseRightAI
HomeModelsAsk AIComparePricingWhat's New
UseRightAICut through AI hype. Pick what works.

Independent AI model tracker. Live pricing, real benchmarks, zero vendor bias.

X (Twitter)LinkedInUpdatesContact

Compare

Opus 4.8 vs Opus 4.7Fable 5 vs Opus 4.8New AI Models 2026ChatGPT vs ClaudeGPT-4o vs Claude SonnetClaude vs GeminiDeepSeek vs ChatGPTMistral vs ClaudeGemini Flash vs GPT-4o MiniLlama vs ChatGPTAll comparisons →Build your own →

Best For

CodingWritingDevelopersProduct ManagersDesignersSalesBest Cheap AIBest Free AI

Pricing & Data

API Token PricingCost per TaskPrice HistoryBenchmark ScoresPrivacy & SafetySubscription PlansPlan Usage LimitsCost CalculatorWhich AI is Cheapest?Cheapest AI APIs

Company

About UseRightAIContactWhat ChangedAll ModelsEditorial PolicyDisclosuresPrivacy PolicyTerms of Service

© 2026 UseRightAI. Independent · Free forever · Not affiliated with any AI provider.

Affiliate links are clearly labeled. See disclosures.

Home/Best AI for Coding
Top recommendation

Best AI for Coding

The best coding model is the one that catches more complexity than it creates. These picks are tuned for real engineering work, not benchmark theater.

Last verified: September 2026

/Rankings refresh daily when model data changes
Rankings refresh dailyScored on 6 criteriaNo paid rankings
Best pick right now
OpenAIPremium

GPT-6 Astra

OpenAI's frontier answer to Fable 5.1 — computer-use and agentic-coding leader at $10/$50.

View model
Cost in
$10.00/1M
Context
1.1M tokens
Speed
Deliberate
Best overall
GPT-6 Astra
Best budget
Claude Opus 4.8
Best speed
Claude Opus 5
Why it wins

The top model handles debugging, architecture, and code edits without losing the plot.

Strong alternatives still exist if you need better value or faster responses.

The ranking prioritizes practical usefulness over hype cycles.

Decision notes

Choose the top pick when accuracy and reliability matter more than raw cost.

Choose a cheaper alternative when prompt volume is high and failure cost is lower.

Choose a faster model when you need rapid iteration more than maximum reasoning depth.

Interactive decision lab

Tune the best ai for coding ranking

Use the controls to see how the recommendation changes when your workflow shifts toward quality, cost, speed, or long-context work.

#1GPT-6 Astra91 pts
#2Claude Opus 591 pts
#3Claude Fable 591 pts
#4Claude Fable 5.191 pts
#5Claude Opus 4.890 pts
Quality first

GPT-6 Astra

OpenAI / Premium / Sep 4, 2026

91

OpenAI's frontier answer to Fable 5.1 — computer-use and agentic-coding leader at $10/$50.

Ranks models by the broadest mix of coding, writing, research, and long-context usefulness.

Cost
$10.00/1M
$50.00/1M out
Speed
Deliberate
2/5 score
Context
1.1M tokens
input window
View model
Data-backed recommendation
Avoid this pick if

You are cost-sensitive or latency-bound — GPT-5.6 Sol is a fifth of the price — or you need it today in an Enterprise workspace, where it is off by default, or for offensive-security work, which it refuses outside OpenAI Daybreak.

Strengths

OSWorld 2.0 72.6% vs 65.7% for GPT-5.6 Sol, in roughly 47% less time per task — the new computer-use ceiling

Terminal-Bench 4.0 57.9% — ahead of Claude Fable 5.1 (55.8%), Opus 5 (52.3%) and GPT-5.6 Sol (37.3%)

FrontierMath Tier 4 (v2) 97.6% vs Fable 5.1's 87.8%; Terminal-Bench Science 64.6% vs 52.6%; GPQA Diamond 96.0%

1.05M context with 96.3% on OpenAI MRCR 8-needle at 512K–1M (Sol: 73.8%) and 128K max output

OpenAI's lowest misaligned-outcome rates to date: 2.4% on its computer-use safety benchmark vs 22.0% for Sol, 0% scope-creep on impossible cyber tasks vs 48%

Weaknesses

$10/$50 per 1M — five times GPT-5.6 Sol's $2/$10 and the same premium as Claude Fable 5.1; Fast mode doubles it again

Trails Claude Fable 5.1 on Humanity's Last Exam with tools (57.2% vs 65.0%) and on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (61.2 vs 65.7)

OpenAI published no SWE-bench Verified or SWE-bench Pro figure at launch, so it does not appear on our SWE-bench leaderboard

Rolling out over days, not instantly: Enterprise access is off by default, advanced cyber tasks are refused outside OpenAI Daybreak, and the safety layer can pause or stop legitimate agent runs

OpenAI's own system card finds its written reasoning harder to monitor than Sol's

Ranked alternatives

Strong backups depending on your budget, workload, and preferred tradeoffs.

AnthropicPremium

Claude Opus 4.8

Anthropic's newest Opus flagship — 69.2% SWE-Bench Pro, 88.6% SWE-Bench Verified, 1890 Arena Elo (121 pts ahead of GPT-5.5), and native parallel subagents. Same $5/$25 price as Opus 4.7.

Verdict
Best value premium coder — frontier-grade at half of Fable 5's price.
Quality score
97%
Pricing
$5.00/1M in
$25.00/1M out
Speed
Deliberate
2/5 speed
Context
1M tokens
Launched May 27, 2026. Available on Claude API, AWS Bedrock, Google Vertex AI, Microsoft Foundry, and GitHub Copilot. Fast mode available at $10/$50 per 1M tokens.
Coding leaderSWE-bench Pro #1Parallel subagentsAgenticLong contextPremiumNew
Best for
Hardest coding tasks, parallel agentic workflows, and high-fidelity vision
View model
AnthropicPremium

Claude Opus 5

Anthropic's flagship-tier Opus that comes close to Claude Fable 5's frontier intelligence at half the price — the new default for complex agentic coding and enterprise agents.

Verdict
Best premium model for agentic coding — near-Fable 5 quality at half the price.
Quality score
97%
Pricing
$5.00/1M in
$25.00/1M out
Speed
Deliberate
2/5 speed
Context
1M tokens
Released July 24, 2026 at Opus 4.8's exact pricing. 1M context at standard rates, 128K max output. Anthropic's alignment audit calls it their most aligned model to date. Default model on Claude Max plans.
CodingAgenticFlagship1M contextPremium
Best for
Complex agentic coding and enterprise agent workflows
View model
AnthropicPremium

Claude Fable 5

Anthropic's new Mythos-class flagship and the most capable coding model anyone can use — 80.3% SWE-Bench Pro, an 11-point jump over Opus 4.8. 1M context, 128K output, native parallel subagents. Released June 9, 2026.

Verdict
New global #1 — 80.3% SWE-Bench Pro, the most capable model generally available.
Quality score
98%
Pricing
$10.00/1M in
$50.00/1M out
Speed
Deliberate
2/5 speed
Context
1M tokens
Launched June 9, 2026 as the public, Mythos-class release. Available on the Claude API, Microsoft Foundry, and Google Vertex AI. Free for all users until June 22, 2026. Same underlying model as Claude Mythos 5, with safeguards that block specific high-risk cyber responses.
Coding leaderSWE-Bench Pro #1Mythos-classParallel subagentsAgenticLong contextPremiumNew
Best for
The hardest coding tasks, autonomous multi-step agents, and frontier-grade reasoning
View model
AnthropicPremium

Claude Fable 5.1

Anthropic's September 1, 2026 frontier release and the new capability ceiling for coding, agents, and scientific work. Base pricing is unchanged at $10/$50, but cache reads dropped 75% to $0.25/1M — roughly 25% cheaper on typical workloads and up to 45% cheaper on agentic ones. 1M context, 128K output, adaptive thinking always on.

Verdict
New frontier leader — better than Fable 5 on every published benchmark, and cheaper to run.
Quality score
98%
Pricing
$10.00/1M in
$50.00/1M out
Speed
Deliberate
2/5 speed
Context
1M tokens
Released September 1, 2026 alongside Claude Mythos 5.1, the first update to the Mythos-class line since Fable 5 on June 9. API ID claude-fable-5-1; generally available on the Claude API, Amazon Bedrock, Google Cloud, and Microsoft Foundry. Published launch numbers (Fable 5.1 / Fable 5 / Opus 5 / GPT-5.6 Sol): Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 52.6 / 24.7 / 29.0 / 22.4; Terminal-Bench 4.0 55.8 / 42.0 / 52.3 / 37.3; CursorBench 3.2.0 73.4 / 70.5 / 70.0 / 67.2; AutomationBench 31.4 / 17.1 / 26.9 / 19.6; OSWorld 2.0 strict 41.7 / 36.1 / 39.6; Humanity's Last Exam (no tools) 60.9 / 57.8 / 56.6; GDPval-AA v2 1853 / 1723 / 1824 / 1711. GDPval-AA v2 is rescaled from the v1 numbers quoted on the Fable 5 page and is not directly comparable to them.
Coding leaderFrontierAgenticMythos-classLong contextCheaper cachingPremiumNew
Best for
Frontier agentic coding, long-horizon autonomous work, and agentic scientific research
View model

How we evaluate AI models

UseRightAI recommendations are based on practical decision factors people actually feel in day-to-day use.

Explore related decisions

Browse all modelsCompare pricingView GPT-6 AstraBest AI for AccountantsBest AI ChatbotBest AI AssistantBest AI for Designers

Side-by-side specs

List prices and published scores — the numbers this page's pick is built from.

ModelInputOutputEst. monthContextSpeedCodingWritingResearch
GPT-6 AstraOpenAI$10.00/1M$50.00/1M$2001.1M tokensDeliberate10097100
Claude Opus 4.8Anthropic$5.00/1M$25.00/1M$1001M tokensDeliberate1009698
Claude Opus 5Anthropic$5.00/1M$25.00/1M$1001M tokensDeliberate1009698
Claude Fable 5Anthropic$10.00/1M$50.00/1M$2001M tokensDeliberate10098100
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic$10.00/1M$50.00/1M$2001M tokensDeliberate10098100

Scores out of 100 — how we evaluate models. “Est. month” is 10M in / 2M out at list price: a ceiling, no discounts.

The case for each model

Why each one is on the shortlist for coding, what it is genuinely good at, and when we would steer you away from it.

GPT-6 Astra

Top pickOpenAI

The default answer for coding — 100/100 on the coding axis, and the model we would start with unless the price below rules it out.

OpenAI's September 3, 2026 frontier release — the first GPT-6 model and OpenAI's answer to Claude Fable 5.1 two days earlier. State of the art on computer use (OSWorld 2.0 72.6% in ~47% less time than GPT-5.6 Sol), agentic coding (Terminal-Bench 4.0 57.9%), and frontier math (FrontierMath Tier 4 97.6%). $10/$50 per 1M tokens, 1.05M context, 128K output, knowledge cutoff April 30, 2026.

Input
$10.00/1M
Output
$50.00/1M
Context
1.1M tokens
Speed
Deliberate

What people actually use it for

  • Computer-use agents that fill forms, update CRMs, run QA in a browser — 72.6% on OSWorld 2.0 at ~40 minutes per task vs Sol's 75
  • Agentic coding in Codex with cross-context notes — 57.9% Terminal-Bench 4.0, ahead of Claude Fable 5.1 (55.8%)
  • Frontier math and science — 97.6% FrontierMath Tier 4 and 64.6% Terminal-Bench Science, both well clear of every rival OpenAI tested

Where it wins

  • OSWorld 2.0 72.6% vs 65.7% for GPT-5.6 Sol, in roughly 47% less time per task — the new computer-use ceiling
  • Terminal-Bench 4.0 57.9% — ahead of Claude Fable 5.1 (55.8%), Opus 5 (52.3%) and GPT-5.6 Sol (37.3%)
  • FrontierMath Tier 4 (v2) 97.6% vs Fable 5.1's 87.8%; Terminal-Bench Science 64.6% vs 52.6%; GPQA Diamond 96.0%
  • 1.05M context with 96.3% on OpenAI MRCR 8-needle at 512K–1M (Sol: 73.8%) and 128K max output
  • OpenAI's lowest misaligned-outcome rates to date: 2.4% on its computer-use safety benchmark vs 22.0% for Sol, 0% scope-creep on impossible cyber tasks vs 48%

Where it falls down

  • $10/$50 per 1M — five times GPT-5.6 Sol's $2/$10 and the same premium as Claude Fable 5.1; Fast mode doubles it again
  • Trails Claude Fable 5.1 on Humanity's Last Exam with tools (57.2% vs 65.0%) and on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (61.2 vs 65.7)
  • OpenAI published no SWE-bench Verified or SWE-bench Pro figure at launch, so it does not appear on our SWE-bench leaderboard
  • Rolling out over days, not instantly: Enterprise access is off by default, advanced cyber tasks are refused outside OpenAI Daybreak, and the safety layer can pause or stop legitimate agent runs
  • OpenAI's own system card finds its written reasoning harder to monitor than Sol's

Skip it if

You are cost-sensitive or latency-bound — GPT-5.6 Sol is a fifth of the price — or you need it today in an Enterprise workspace, where it is off by default, or for offensive-security work, which it refuses outside OpenAI Daybreak.

Our verdict

The new computer-use and agentic-coding ceiling, and OpenAI's first model priced like a Mythos-class Claude. Astra beats Claude Fable 5.1 on Terminal-Bench 4.0 (57.9% vs 55.8%), Terminal-Bench Science (64.6% vs 52.6%) and FrontierMath Tier 4 (97.6% vs 87.8%), and it is the only model with a credible OSWorld 2.0 result above 70%. It loses to Fable 5.1 on Humanity's Last Exam and on Artificial Analysis's index, costs five times GPT-5.6 Sol, and ships without a SWE-bench number. If your work is computer use, browser agents or math, it is the pick; for everyday coding at scale, Sol at $2/$10 remains the value default.

Full pricing, benchmark table and release notes on the GPT-6 Astra page.

Claude Opus 4.8

Anthropic

The value option for coding: about 50% less per token than GPT-6 Astra, at 100/100 on coding. Worth starting here and moving up only if the output disappoints.

Anthropic's newest Opus flagship — 69.2% SWE-Bench Pro, 88.6% SWE-Bench Verified, 1890 Arena Elo (121 pts ahead of GPT-5.5), and native parallel subagents. Same $5/$25 price as Opus 4.7.

Input
$5.00/1M
Output
$25.00/1M
Context
1M tokens
Speed
Deliberate

What people actually use it for

  • Running parallel subagent workflows that split, solve, and merge complex engineering tasks
  • Autonomous PR review and multi-file refactors where accuracy matters more than speed
  • Deep research synthesis across 1M-token corpora — patents, codebases, legal documents

Where it wins

  • 69.2% SWE-Bench Pro — new #1, up from Opus 4.7's 64.3%
  • 88.6% SWE-Bench Verified and 83.4% OSWorld computer use
  • Native parallel subagents: orchestrated multi-agent execution in a single call
  • 1890 Arena Elo, 121 points ahead of GPT-5.5

Where it falls down

  • Deliberate pace — not the right pick for latency-sensitive applications
  • Same price tier as Opus 4.7; not a budget option

Skip it if

You need low-latency responses, image generation, or a workflow locked to OpenAI tooling.

Our verdict

The best value at the premium tier now that Claude Fable 5 leads on raw capability. 69.2% SWE-Bench Pro, 1890 Elo, and built-in parallel subagents at $5/$25 — half the price of Fable 5. The smart default for serious coding when you don't need the absolute frontier.

Full pricing, benchmark table and release notes on the Claude Opus 4.8 page.

Claude Opus 5

Anthropic

The fastest model in this shortlist for coding. Pick it when turnaround is what your readers or users notice.

Input
$5.00/1M
Output
$25.00/1M
Context
1M tokens
Speed
Deliberate

Best premium model for agentic coding — near-Fable 5 quality at half the price. Full Claude Opus 5 review →

Claude Fable 5

Anthropic

Also worth a look for coding, at 100/100 on the coding axis.

Input
$10.00/1M
Output
$50.00/1M
Context
1M tokens
Speed
Deliberate

New global #1 — 80.3% SWE-Bench Pro, the most capable model generally available. Full Claude Fable 5 review →

Newsletter

Get updates when this ranking changes

Pricing shifts, new alternatives, and recommendation changes — straight to your inbox.

No spam. Useful updates only. Affiliate disclosures always clearly labeled.

FAQ

What is the best AI for coding?

For coding, GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI) is our pick. OpenAI's frontier answer to Fable 5.1 — computer-use and agentic-coding leader at $10/$50. It costs $10/1M input and $50/1M output tokens, with a 1.05M-token context window — enough headroom for all but the largest coding jobs. Claude Opus 4.8 is the closest alternative if it doesn't fit your setup.

Why GPT-6 Astra for coding?

Because the work it is built for overlaps closely with coding: computer-use agents that fill forms, update CRMs, run QA in a browser — 72.6% on OSWorld 2.0 at ~40 minutes per task vs Sol's 75 and agentic coding in Codex with cross-context notes — 57.9% Terminal-Bench 4.0, ahead of Claude Fable 5.1 (55.8%). The new computer-use and agentic-coding ceiling, and OpenAI's first model priced like a Mythos-class Claude. Astra beats Claude Fable 5.1 on Terminal-Bench 4.0 (57.9% vs 55.8%), Terminal-Bench Science (64.6% vs 52.6%) and FrontierMath Tier 4 (97.6% vs 87.8%), and it is the only model with a credible OSWorld 2.0 result above 70%. It loses to Fable 5.1 on Humanity's Last Exam and on Artificial Analysis's index, costs five times GPT-5.6 Sol, and ships without a SWE-bench number. If your work is computer use, browser agents or math, it is the pick; for everyday coding at scale, Sol at $2/$10 remains the value default.

What does it cost to use GPT-6 Astra for coding?

On a moderate month — 10M input and 2M output tokens — GPT-6 Astra runs about $200.00 at list price, with no batch or caching discounts applied, so treat that as a ceiling. Claude Opus 4.8 is the cheaper route at roughly $100.00 for the same volume, if coding is high-volume enough for price to lead the decision.

When is GPT-6 Astra the wrong choice for coding?

$10/$50 per 1M — five times GPT-5.6 Sol's $2/$10 and the same premium as Claude Fable 5.1; Fast mode doubles it again. Trails Claude Fable 5.1 on Humanity's Last Exam with tools (57.2% vs 65.0%) and on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (61.2 vs 65.7). Avoid it if you are cost-sensitive or latency-bound — GPT-5.6 Sol is a fifth of the price — or you need it today in an Enterprise workspace, where it is off by default, or for offensive-security work, which it refuses outside OpenAI Daybreak. None of that rules it out for coding on its own — but if one of those limits maps onto how you actually work, take the alternative on this page seriously rather than defaulting to the top pick.

Is there a cheaper AI that still handles coding?

Claude Opus 4.8 at $5/1M input is the budget option here. Best value premium coder — frontier-grade at half of Fable 5's price. Expect a quality step down on the hardest cases — the usual pattern is to route routine coding volume to Claude Opus 4.8 and keep GPT-6 Astra for the work where a wrong answer is expensive.