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 ModelsGuidesEditorial PolicyDisclosuresPrivacy PolicyTerms of Service

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

Affiliate links are clearly labeled. See disclosures.

Home/Best Long Context AI
Top recommendation

Best Long Context AI

Long-context AI matters when your work actually needs it. These picks are for teams reading huge docs, giant transcripts, and complex product context.

Last verified: October 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 5.5
Best long-context
Claude Fable 5.1
Why it wins

The top long-context pick stays coherent across very large inputs.

Lower-cost alternatives help if you need more volume without flagship pricing.

The ranking rewards useful long-window reasoning, not just headline token counts.

Decision notes

Choose the top pick when long inputs and synthesis quality are equally important.

Choose a budget alternative if you need a large window without premium cost.

Choose a premium reasoning model if your context is large but not truly enormous.

Interactive decision lab

Tune the best long context ai ranking

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

#1Claude Opus 5.592 pts
#2GPT-6 Astra91 pts
#3Claude Fable 5.191 pts
#4Claude Fable 590 pts
#5Claude Opus 590 pts
Quality first

Claude Opus 5.5

Anthropic / Premium / Oct 10, 2026

92

Anthropic's new coding default — top SWE-bench Pro score at a lower price than Opus 5.

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

Cost
$4.00/1M
$20.00/1M out
Speed
Deliberate
2/5 score
Context
1M tokens
input window
View model
Data-backed recommendation
Avoid this pick if

Your tasks are well-scoped and latency-sensitive — Sonnet 5.5 is half the price and Anthropic says it is the fastest Sonnet yet.

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 — two and a half times GPT-5.6 Sol's $4/$20 promotional rate, five times GPT-6.1 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 Fable 5.1

Anthropic's September 1, 2026 frontier release for coding, agents, and scientific work. On SWE-bench Pro the cheaper Claude Opus 5.5 now scores higher (89.9% vs 81.2% in Anthropic's table). 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
Anthropic's highest-ceiling model — strongest on open-ended research; Opus 5.5 now leads coding.
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
AnthropicPremium

Claude Fable 5

Anthropic's June 9, 2026 Mythos-class flagship. At launch it was the most capable coding model anyone could use — 80.3% SWE-Bench Pro, an 11-point jump over Opus 4.8 — and it has since been overtaken by Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Opus 5.5. 1M context, 128K output, native parallel subagents.

Verdict
Superseded by Fable 5.1 — still 80.3% SWE-Bench Pro, but 5.1 is better and cheaper to run.
Quality score
97%
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. Superseded by Claude Fable 5.1 on September 1, 2026 — same $10/$50 base pricing, cache reads cut from $1.00 to $0.25 per 1M tokens.
SWE-Bench Pro 80.3%Mythos-classParallel subagentsAgenticLong contextPremiumSuperseded
Best for
The hardest coding tasks, autonomous multi-step agents, and frontier-grade reasoning
View model
AnthropicPremium

Claude Opus 5.5

Anthropic's September 22, 2026 Opus — a step up from Opus 5 on agentic coding, long-running agent work and vision, at a lower $4/$20 list price and with fewer tokens spent per finished task.

Verdict
Anthropic's new coding default — top SWE-bench Pro score at a lower price than Opus 5.
Quality score
98%
Pricing
$4.00/1M in
$20.00/1M out
Speed
Deliberate
2/5 speed
Context
1M tokens
Released September 22, 2026. Gateway id anthropic/claude-opus-5.5. $4/$20 per 1M (cache read $0.20, cache write $5); Fast mode $8/$40. 1,000,000 context, 128,000 max output, knowledge cutoff June 2026, effort levels low to max. Launch figures as reported by Anthropic: SWE-bench Pro 89.9 (Fable 5.1 81.2, Opus 5 79.2); SWE-bench Multilingual 93.9; Terminal-Bench 4.0 66.4 (xhigh); OSWorld 2.1 81.8; Humanity's Last Exam 67.7; Toolathlon Verified 77.8 (Opus 5 80.6). Verified October 10, 2026.
CodingAgenticFlagship1M contextPremiumNew
Best for
Agentic coding, long-running agents and knowledge work where Opus 5 was the bar
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
Strong premium coder, now replaced by the cheaper Opus 5.5.
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. Superseded on September 22, 2026 by Claude Opus 5.5, which is cheaper at $4/$20.
CodingAgenticFlagship1M contextPremium
Best for
Complex agentic coding and enterprise agent workflows
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 CodingBest AI for WritingBest AI for ResearchBest AI for Images

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 tokensDeliberate9997100
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic$10.00/1M$50.00/1M$2001M tokensDeliberate9998100
Claude Fable 5Anthropic$10.00/1M$50.00/1M$2001M tokensDeliberate989798
Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic$4.00/1M$20.00/1M$801M tokensDeliberate1009799
Claude Opus 5Anthropic$5.00/1M$25.00/1M$1001M tokensDeliberate989698

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 long context AI, what it is genuinely good at, and when we would steer you away from it.

GPT-6 Astra

Top pickOpenAI

Ranked first here for long context AI: 100/100 on long-context, with the widest margin of anything in this line-up.

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 — two and a half times GPT-5.6 Sol's $4/$20 promotional rate, five times GPT-6.1 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-6.1 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, GPT-6.1 Sol at $2/$10 is the value default — OpenAI says it comes close to Astra at a fifth of the price.

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

Claude Fable 5.1

Anthropic

The long-document choice for long context AI — the largest context window in this shortlist, so whole files go in at once.

Anthropic's September 1, 2026 frontier release for coding, agents, and scientific work. On SWE-bench Pro the cheaper Claude Opus 5.5 now scores higher (89.9% vs 81.2% in Anthropic's table). 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.

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

What people actually use it for

  • Agentic scientific research — 52.6% on Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1, more than double Fable 5's 24.7%
  • Long-running autonomous coding agents that plan, run, and debug across a whole repository
  • Cache-heavy agent loops where the 75% cache-read cut ($1.00 → $0.25 per 1M) is the real saving

Where it wins

  • 52.6% Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 — 2.1x Fable 5 (24.7%), well clear of Opus 5 (29.0%) and GPT-5.6 Sol (22.4%)
  • 55.8% Terminal-Bench 4.0 agentic coding, ahead of Opus 5 (52.3%) and Fable 5 (42.0%)
  • Cache reads cut 75% to $0.25/1M — ~25% cheaper for typical use, ~45% for heavily agentic work
  • Independent Vals AI evaluation ranks it #1 of 51 on the Vals Index, #1 on LiveCodeBench (90.5%) and MMLU Pro (92.4%)
  • 1M-token context and 128K max output at standard rates, with adaptive thinking always enabled

Where it falls down

  • Base rates are still $10/$50 per 1M — double Claude Opus 5 for anything that is not cache-heavy
  • Anthropic published no SWE-bench Verified or SWE-bench Pro figure for 5.1 at launch
  • On Claude Pro it only runs on pay-as-you-go credits; Max includes it up to 50% of weekly limits
  • Deliberate, high-latency profile — the wrong choice for interactive, latency-bound apps

Skip it if

You need low latency, or your workload is uncached and cost-sensitive — Claude Opus 5 is half the base price and within a few points on agentic coding.

Our verdict

Anthropic's highest-ceiling model, and the rare upgrade that costs less than the model it replaces — though for coding alone, Claude Opus 5.5 now scores higher at $4/$20. Base $10/$50 pricing did not move, but a 75% cut to cache reads makes typical workloads ~25% cheaper than Fable 5 and heavily agentic ones ~45% cheaper — while more than doubling Fable 5 on agentic science and beating Opus 5 on agentic coding. If you were already on Fable 5, switching is a straight win. If you were on Opus 5 for the price, it still costs 2x on uncached tokens.

Full pricing, benchmark table and release notes on the Claude Fable 5.1 page.

Claude Fable 5

Anthropic

The alternative to check next for long context AI — 99/100 on long-context.

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

Superseded by Fable 5.1 — still 80.3% SWE-Bench Pro, but 5.1 is better and cheaper to run. Full Claude Fable 5 review →

Claude Opus 5.5

Anthropic

The cost-conscious pick for long context AI, about 60% less per token than GPT-6 Astra than the top choice while holding 98/100 on long-context.

Input
$4.00/1M
Output
$20.00/1M
Context
1M tokens
Speed
Deliberate

Anthropic's new coding default — top SWE-bench Pro score at a lower price than Opus 5. Full Claude Opus 5.5 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 long context AI?

For long context AI, 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 long context AI jobs. Claude Fable 5.1 is the closest alternative if it doesn't fit your setup.

Why GPT-6 Astra for long context AI?

Because the work it is built for overlaps closely with long context AI: 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, GPT-6.1 Sol at $2/$10 is the value default — OpenAI says it comes close to Astra at a fifth of the price.

What does it cost to use GPT-6 Astra for long context AI?

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 5.5 is the cheaper route at roughly $80.00 for the same volume, if long context AI is high-volume enough for price to lead the decision.

When is GPT-6 Astra the wrong choice for long context AI?

$10/$50 per 1M — two and a half times GPT-5.6 Sol's $4/$20 promotional rate, five times GPT-6.1 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-6.1 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 long context AI 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 long context AI?

Claude Opus 5.5 at $4/1M input is the budget option here. Anthropic's new coding default — top SWE-bench Pro score at a lower price than Opus 5. Expect a quality step down on the hardest cases — the usual pattern is to route routine long context AI volume to Claude Opus 5.5 and keep GPT-6 Astra for the work where a wrong answer is expensive.