Compare/o1 vs Claude 3 Opus

o1vsClaude 3 Opus

Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.

OpenAI

o1

Input
$15/M
Output
$60/M
Speed
TTFT
Anthropic

Claude 3 Opus

Input
$15/M
Output
$75/M
Speed
TTFT

Winner by Category

Cheaper
o1
Faster (tok/s)
Lower Latency
Benchmarks (2-0)
o1

Pricing Comparison

Metrico1Claude 3 Opus
Input ($/M tokens)$15$15
Output ($/M tokens)$60$75
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
o1$21.00
Claude 3 Opus$22.50

Speed Comparison

Speed data not available for these models.

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. o1 wins the overall benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 overlapping categories, but raw benchmark score is only one input to the decision.

Pricing. Both models sit in the premium bracket for output-token pricing. At 0.8× the per-million-token cost, o1 is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). o1 makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.

Strengths. o1 is strongest on Coding Index (39.7), Intelligence Index (23.9). Claude 3 Opus leads on Coding Index (19.5), Intelligence Index (11.8).

Speed. Speed data is incomplete for this pair; benchmark and price should decide.

Provider. OpenAI and Anthropic sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: OpenAI tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while Anthropic often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.

Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): o1 costs $1350.00 ($16200/year); Claude 3 Opus costs $1575.00 ($18900/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): o1 ≈ $195.00/run, Claude 3 Opus ≈ $225.00/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): o1 ≈ $9000/run, Claude 3 Opus ≈ $10500/run. o1 becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.

Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.

Benchmark Comparison

Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks

Intelligence Index
23.911.8
Coding Index
39.719.5
Math Index
GPQA Diamond
MMLU-Pro
LiveCodeBench
AIME 2025
MATH-500
Humanity's Last Exam
SciCode
IFBench
TerminalBench
o12 wins
0 winsClaude 3 Opus

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, o1 or Claude 3 Opus?

o1 is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $26.25/M tokens vs $30.00/M for Claude 3 Opus.

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

o1 wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Claude 3 Opus. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

Both models have comparable generation speeds.

When should I use o1 vs Claude 3 Opus?

Choose based on your priorities: o1 for lower cost, o1 for stronger benchmark performance, and both have comparable speed. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.