Is Claude Opus 5 really the best coding model in 2026?

On the BenchLM.ai leaderboard, Claude Opus 5 ranks #1 out of 215 tracked models with an overall score of 85.88, and it posts 96.0% on SWE-bench Verified — the highest of any model we tracked. GPT-5.6 Sol scores higher on Terminal-Bench 2.1 (88.8% vs Opus 5's untested-on-that-suite status) and the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index, so 'best' depends on whether your workload looks more like single-issue bug fixes (Opus 5's strength) or terminal-based agentic tool use (where GPT-5.6 Sol and Claude Fable 5 both post strong Terminal-Bench numbers).

What is the difference between SWE-bench Verified and SWE-Bench Pro?

SWE-bench Verified is a curated, human-verified set of single-issue GitHub bug-fix tasks — Claude Opus 5 scores 96.0% here. SWE-Bench Pro is a separate, harder suite built around professional-scale, multi-file pull request resolution, and Opus 5 scores 79.2% on it. The two numbers are not on the same scale and should not be averaged or directly compared — a model can be excellent at one and mediocre at the other.

Which GPT-5.6 tier should I use for coding?

GPT-5.6 Sol is the strongest coding tier: 88.8% Terminal-Bench 2.1, 64.6% SWE-Bench Pro, at $5 input / $30 output per million tokens. Terra trades a small amount of accuracy (87.4% Terminal-Bench, 63.4% SWE-Bench Pro) for half the price ($2.50/$15). Luna is the budget option (84.7% Terminal-Bench, $1/$6) — reasonable for lighter autocomplete-style tasks but the weakest of the three on every coding metric we tracked.

Back to Tools

Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6 Coding BenchmarksSortable, filterable benchmark data explorer

Updated July 2026 · Data cross-referenced from BenchLM.ai and developersdigest.tech

Claude Opus 5 currently sits at #1 out of 215 models on the BenchLM.ai overall leaderboard, with a score of 85.88 and 96.0% on SWE-bench Verified — the highest coding score in this table. But "best" depends on what you're measuring: GPT-5.6 Sol posts the strongest Terminal-Bench 2.1 result (88.8%) and the highest Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index score (80), while Claude Fable 5 quietly leads SWE-Bench Pro at 80.0%. Claude Mythos 5 ranks #2 overall on BenchLM but is invitation-only (Project Glasswing), so it has no public coding benchmark or price yet.

The table below covers all seven models Anthropic and OpenAI have shipped or previewed as of July 2026: Claude Opus 5, Mythos 5, Fable 5, and the outgoing Opus 4.8, plus OpenAI's three-tier GPT-5.6 lineup (Sol, Terra, Luna). Use the tabs to jump to the column that matters for your decision — Overall rank, Coding accuracy, Agentic tool-use, or Pricing — then click any column header to re-sort ascending or descending. Rows with no public number for a given suite show "n/a" rather than a guessed value.

One honesty note up front: SWE-bench Verified, SWE-Bench Pro, Terminal-Bench 2.1, and the Coding Agent Index are four different tests. We explain exactly how below the table — don't average across them.

GamsGo

Access Claude Pro and ChatGPT Plus at 30-40% below standard pricing via group subscription

Get Cheaper AI Access

Click any column header to sort. The highlighted column matches the active tab above.


Claude Opus 5 · AnthropicTop pick right now	#1 · 85.88	96.0%	79.2%	n/a	n/a	68.8%	$5.00	$25.00
Claude Mythos 5 · Anthropic	#2 · 83.01	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Claude Fable 5 · Anthropic	#3 · 82.76	n/a	80.0%	83.1%	77.2	69.7%	$10.00	$50.00
GPT-5.6 Sol · OpenAI	#4 · 81.46	n/a	64.6%	88.8%	80.0	72.7%	$5.00	$30.00
Claude Opus 4.8 · Anthropic	#6 · 77.44	88.6%	69.2%	78.9%	72.5	59.0%	$5.00	$25.00
GPT-5.6 Terra · OpenAI	n/a	n/a	63.4%	87.4%	77.4	69.6%	$2.50	$15.00
GPT-5.6 Luna · OpenAI	n/a	n/a	62.7%	84.7%	74.6	67.2%	$1.00	$6.00

Notes on n/a values

Claude Opus 5: 1M token context, 128K max output

Claude Mythos 5: Invitation-only (Project Glasswing) — no public SWE-bench score — Not publicly priced — invitation-only research preview

Claude Opus 4.8: Widely reported by third-party trackers, not on this BenchLM leaderboard

Claude Opus 5 additional agentic scores: SWE-bench Multilingual 89.5% · CursorBench 3.2 70.0% · Toolathlon Pass@1 / Pass@3 80.6% / 87.0% · OSWorld 2.0 70.6%

Why these numbers aren't directly comparable

SWE-bench Verified, SWE-bench Pro, Terminal-Bench 2.1, and the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index are different benchmark suites testing different things (single-issue-fix verification vs professional-scale PR resolution vs terminal/agentic tool-use vs a blended index). A high score on one doesn't directly translate to another — we show each model's number on whichever suites its publisher/independent tracker has published, not a single normalized score, so you can judge fit for your specific workload rather than chase one number.

Sources: BenchLM.ai leaderboard (Claude Opus 5, Mythos 5, Fable 5, Opus 4.8 overall rank/score and Opus 5's SWE-bench figures) · developersdigest.tech "GPT-5.6 vs Claude 5 Coding Model Tiers" (GPT-5.6 tier coding scores and pricing) · Anthropic official pricing docs (Opus 5 context/pricing). Cross-referenced July 2026.

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5 really the best coding model in 2026?: On the BenchLM.ai leaderboard, Claude Opus 5 ranks #1 out of 215 tracked models with an overall score of 85.88, and it posts 96.0% on SWE-bench Verified — the highest of any model we tracked. GPT-5.6 Sol scores higher on Terminal-Bench 2.1 (88.8% vs Opus 5's untested-on-that-suite status) and the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index, so 'best' depends on whether your workload looks more like single-issue bug fixes (Opus 5's strength) or terminal-based agentic tool use (where GPT-5.6 Sol and Claude Fable 5 both post strong Terminal-Bench numbers).
What is the difference between SWE-bench Verified and SWE-Bench Pro?: SWE-bench Verified is a curated, human-verified set of single-issue GitHub bug-fix tasks — Claude Opus 5 scores 96.0% here. SWE-Bench Pro is a separate, harder suite built around professional-scale, multi-file pull request resolution, and Opus 5 scores 79.2% on it. The two numbers are not on the same scale and should not be averaged or directly compared — a model can be excellent at one and mediocre at the other.
Which GPT-5.6 tier should I use for coding?: GPT-5.6 Sol is the strongest coding tier: 88.8% Terminal-Bench 2.1, 64.6% SWE-Bench Pro, at $5 input / $30 output per million tokens. Terra trades a small amount of accuracy (87.4% Terminal-Bench, 63.4% SWE-Bench Pro) for half the price ($2.50/$15). Luna is the budget option (84.7% Terminal-Bench, $1/$6) — reasonable for lighter autocomplete-style tasks but the weakest of the three on every coding metric we tracked.