Claude Opus 4.8 wins on coding (100 vs 99) and price ($5 vs $15/1M input). For most workflows, Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger default — best value premium coder — frontier-grade at half of fable 5's price.
The shortest way to see the safest default, the lower-cost option, and the specialist pick before you read deeper.
Claude Opus 4.8 is the safest overall answer here when you want the strongest default instead of the lowest list price.
Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is the lower-cost option to start with when you still need useful output at scale.
Claude Opus 4.6 is the better pick when response speed matters more than maximum reasoning depth.
Claude Opus 4.8 leads on coding with a score of 100 vs 99 for Claude Opus 4.6.
Claude Opus 4.8 is cheaper at $5/1M input tokens vs $15/1M for Claude Opus 4.6.
Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger default for coding tasks.
Choose Claude Opus 4.8 for coding and research — hardest coding tasks.
Choose Claude Opus 4.6 when agentic coding.
Both models serve different primary workflows — consider using each where it has a clear edge.
Switch the scoring lens to see whether the top answer changes when you care more about cost, speed, or long-document work.
Anthropic / Premium / May 27, 2026
New #1 on SWE-Bench Pro — parallel subagents, same price as Opus 4.7.
Ranks models by the broadest mix of coding, writing, research, and long-context usefulness.
You need low-latency responses, image generation, or a workflow locked to OpenAI tooling.
The fastest way to see where the recommendation shifts when your priority changes.
New #1 on SWE-Bench Pro — parallel subagents, same price as Opus 4.7.
Previous Opus flagship, now superseded by Claude Opus 4.7.
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
Deliberate pace — not the right pick for latency-sensitive applications
Same price tier as Opus 4.7; not a budget option
UseRightAI recommendations are based on practical decision factors people actually feel in day-to-day use.
Newsletter
Useful if you care about ranking shifts, pricing changes, or a better recommendation appearing in this decision path.
No spam. Useful updates only. Affiliate disclosures always clearly labeled.
Claude Opus 4.8 wins on more categories — coding, research, long context. Claude Opus 4.6 is the better pick when agentic coding. The right choice depends on your specific use case.
Claude Opus 4.8 is cheaper at $5/1M input and $25/1M output. Claude Opus 4.6 costs $15/1M input and $75/1M output.
Both Claude Opus 4.8 and Claude Opus 4.6 have the same 1M context window.
Claude Opus 4.8 is better for coding with a score of 100 vs Claude Opus 4.6's 99 (out of 100). Claude Fable 5 is the overall coding leader in this directory at 100/100.
Both Claude Opus 4.8 and Claude Opus 4.6 have similar speed profiles — rated deliberate.