CompareLLM.ai
Live
Leaderboard
Models
Compare
Best of & Stacks
Research & News
…
CompareLLM.ai
Precision Benchmarks

Programmatic, dated AI model benchmarks, head-to-head comparisons, and Stack Engine presets.

Daily ingest · 06:00 UTC

Analytics & Benchmarks

  • AI Model Leaderboard
  • Head-to-Head Compare Hub
  • Models Directory
  • Stack Engine Presets
  • Frontier Models
  • Open Weights Catalog

Guides & Intent Lists

  • Best LLM Lists (2026)
  • Best Coding LLM
  • Best Cheap LLM
  • Fastest Low-Latency LLM
  • Claude vs GPT Benchmark
  • What is Elo?
  • Methodology Guides
  • News & Dispatches

Transparency & API

  • Evaluation Methodology
  • Benchmark Changelog
  • Public JSON API
  • llms.txt Specification
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sign In / Account

© 2026 CompareLLM. Public benchmark data aggregated from Arena Elo, LiveBench, SWE-bench & OpenRouter.

Every score has a dated snapshot.

Theme:
Currency:
  1. Home
  2. Comparisons
  3. Claude Opus 4.5 vs Llama 3.1 405B

Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 1, 2026

Claude Opus 4.5 vs Llama 3.1 405B benchmark

In this head-to-head showdown, Claude Opus 4.5 delivers higher overall intelligence and human-preferred responses (Elo 1,568 vs 1,370), while Claude Opus 4.5 leads in SWE-bench software engineering benchmarks (76.8%), while Llama 3.1 405B is more budget-friendly at $3.5/1M per 1M output tokens, while Claude Opus 4.5 provides faster response streaming (62 tok/s). Review the complete breakdown below to determine which model best fits your performance and budget requirements.

Executive Comparison Verdict

Bottom Line: Choose Claude Opus 4.5 if your priority is peak reasoning, complex code generation, and top preference Elo. Choose Llama 3.1 405B if you are optimizing for low latency, high throughput, and cost-efficient API deployment.
Share Analysis:
WhatsAppTelegramXLinkedInReddit

Verified Head-to-Head Advantage Breakdown

10 direct benchmark disciplines evaluated across capability, speed, and cost

Claude Opus 4.5 (7)Llama 3.1 405B (3)
Claude Opus 4.5
7 of 10 Wins
✓Preference Elo✓Coding Elo✓LiveBench✓SWE-bench✓GPQA Diamond✓Output speed✓Context window
Llama 3.1 405B
3 of 10 Wins
✓Time to first token✓Input price✓Output price
Anthropic
Leads 7 of 10 metrics
Claude Opus 4.5

Anthropic frontier coding and computer-use model. SWE-bench leader on the official mini-SWE-agent harness in the Feb 2026 refresh.

Elo 1,568$75/1M out
Meta
Leads 3 of 10 metrics
Llama 3.1 405B

Meta flagship open-weight 405B dense foundation model with 128k context window.

Elo 1,370$3.5/1M out

Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking Depth & Cost Scaler

Model A

Simulate accuracy gains vs added response time & token cost

Mode: Medium (16k budget)

Reasoning models “think before answering” by generating internal reasoning tokens. Higher effort improves math, coding, and logic accuracy, but increases response delay and token costs.

Thinking Delay
380 ms
Standard speed
Reasoning Depth
~3,200
Internal tokens
Cost / 1k Calls
$270.00
9.0× standard bill
Accuracy Boost
+5.2% accuracy
STEM & SWE-bench
Top Rival Showdowns for Claude Opus 4.5
All Matchups
Compare vs:vs GPT-5vs Gemini 3 Provs Grok 4.6vs DeepSeek V4 Provs Qwen 3 Max
Preference LeaderClaude Opus 4.5 Wins

Claude Opus 4.5

Δ 198 Arena Elo pts

Throughput LeaderClaude Opus 4.5 Wins

Claude Opus 4.5

62 tok/s

Value per Dollar LeaderLlama 3.1 405B Wins

Llama 3.1 405B

$3.5 / 1M output

Capability Percentiles

Relative percentile scores computed across all active models in the benchmark catalog.

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Leaders Matchup Capability Radar

Comparing top Western standard models with China's leading frontier rival across 6 skill dimensions. Tap any spoke or dot to inspect.

Tap any node to inspect
Percentile 0–100
Head-to-Head Comparison

Overall Matchup Breakdown

Category wins across reasoning intelligence, generation speed, and token cost.

Claude Opus 4.5 (7)vsLlama 3.1 405B (3)
Claude Opus 4.5: 7W (70%)Overall: Claude Opus 4.5Llama 3.1 405B: 3W (30%)
← Claude Opus 4.5Llama 3.1 405B →
🏆Claude Opus 4.5(5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Benchmark
Claude Opus 4.5vsLlama 3.1 405B
Preference Elo
1,568vs1,370+198
Coding Elo
1,574vs1,385+189
SWE-bench
76.8%vs58.4%+18.4%
LiveBench
71.2%vs61.2%+10%
GPQA Diamond
84.1%vs75.2%+8.9%
Claude Opus 4.5: 5WLlama 3.1 405B: 0W
Tied (1-1)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Benchmark
Claude Opus 4.5vsLlama 3.1 405B
Output speed
62 tok/svs42 tok/s+20 tok/s
Time to first token
380 msvs360 ms+20 ms
Claude Opus 4.5: 1WLlama 3.1 405B: 1W
🏆Llama 3.1 405B(2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Benchmark
Claude Opus 4.5vsLlama 3.1 405B
Output price
$75/1Mvs$3.5/1M+$71.5/1M
Input price
$15/1Mvs$1.25/1M+$13.75/1M
Context window
200kvs128k+72k
Claude Opus 4.5: 1WLlama 3.1 405B: 2W

Side-by-Side Benchmark Matrix

Preference Elo+198
Claude Opus 4.51,568
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Llama 3.1 405B1,370
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Coding Elo+189
Claude Opus 4.51,574
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Llama 3.1 405B1,385
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
LiveBench+10%
Claude Opus 4.571.2%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Llama 3.1 405B61.2%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
SWE-bench+18.4%
Claude Opus 4.576.8%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Llama 3.1 405B58.4%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
GPQA Diamond+8.9%
Claude Opus 4.584.1%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Llama 3.1 405B75.2%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Time to first token+20 ms
Claude Opus 4.5380 ms
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Llama 3.1 405B360 ms
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Output speed+20 tok/s
Claude Opus 4.562 tok/s
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Llama 3.1 405B42 tok/s
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Input price+$13.75/1M
Claude Opus 4.5$15/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Llama 3.1 405B$1.25/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Output price+$71.5/1M
Claude Opus 4.5$75/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Llama 3.1 405B$3.5/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Context window+72k
Claude Opus 4.5200k
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
Llama 3.1 405B128k
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5Llama 3.1 405BAdvantage Delta
Preference Elo
1,568
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
1,370
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
+198
Coding Elo
1,574
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
1,385
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
+189
LiveBench
71.2%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
61.2%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
+10%
SWE-bench
76.8%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
58.4%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
+18.4%
GPQA Diamond
84.1%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
75.2%
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
+8.9%
Time to first token
380 ms
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
360 ms
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
+20 ms
Output speed
62 tok/s
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
42 tok/s
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
+20 tok/s
Input price
$15/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
$1.25/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
+$13.75/1M
Output price
$75/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
$3.5/1M
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
+$71.5/1M
Context window
200k
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
128k
seed-bootstrap · Aug 1, 2026
+72k
Interactive Simulator (USD)

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).

Save up to 94% with Llama 3.1 405B
Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo
Quick Presets:
Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out
RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)
Claude Opus 4.5$1,650.00 / mo
In: $525Out: $1,125
Llama 3.1 405B$96.25 / mo
In: $43.75Out: $52.5
Estimated Cost Delta

Llama 3.1 405B is estimated to save $1,553.75/month ($18,645/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

  • 1
    Claude Opus 4.5:Pick Claude Opus 4.5 when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
  • 2
    Llama 3.1 405B:Pick Llama 3.1 405B when you are optimizing output cost.
  • 3
    Llama 3.1 405B:Pick Llama 3.1 405B when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsClaude Opus 4.5

Higher SWE-bench (76.8%).

High-volume chatLlama 3.1 405B

Lower output list price ($3.5/1M).

Voice / low-latency UILlama 3.1 405B

Lower TTFT (360 ms).

Long-document RAGClaude Opus 4.5

Larger window (200k).

Screenshots / visionClaude Opus 4.5

Claude Opus 4.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target WorkloadRecommended PickEvaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agentsClaude Opus 4.5Higher SWE-bench (76.8%).
High-volume chatLlama 3.1 405BLower output list price ($3.5/1M).
Voice / low-latency UILlama 3.1 405BLower TTFT (360 ms).
Long-document RAGClaude Opus 4.5Larger window (200k).
Screenshots / visionClaude Opus 4.5Claude Opus 4.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news
launchFeb 20, 2026

Claude Opus 4.5 and the Feb 2026 SWE-bench row we still cite

The Feb refresh made 4.5 a coding reference. Newer Opus SKUs exist; this row stays as the dated harness point.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

Sign in to cast your verified vote, bookmark models, and participate in benchmark discussions.Sign In to Post

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Social Share Card Preview

Dynamic OpenGraph banner generated at /compare/claude-opus-4-5-vs-llama-3-1-405b/opengraph-image

Save PNG

CompareLLM AI Matrix

Verified Head-to-Head Telemetry

LIVE BENCHMARK
VS
Anthropic

Claude Opus 4.5

Elo 1,568
SWE-bench76.8%
Speed (tok/s)62 tok/s
Input / 1M Tokens$15/1M
Output / 1M Tokens$75/1M
Meta

Llama 3.1 405B

Elo 1,370
SWE-bench58.4%
Speed (tok/s)42 tok/s
Input / 1M Tokens$1.25/1M
Output / 1M Tokens$3.5/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude Opus 4.5 or Llama 3.1 405B?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,568). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, Claude Opus 4.5 or Llama 3.1 405B?
Claude Opus 4.5 leads SWE-bench at 76.8% vs 58.4%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?
Llama 3.1 405B output tokens are $3.5/1M versus $75/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Claude Opus 4.5 or Llama 3.1 405B?
Llama 3.1 405B has the lower time-to-first-token (360 ms vs 380 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?
Claude Opus 4.5 accepts 200k tokens versus 128k.
Can I self-host either model?
Llama 3.1 405B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?
No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?
Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude Opus 4.5 and Llama 3.1 405B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Related news

  • launch · Feb 20, 2026

    Claude Opus 4.5 and the Feb 2026 SWE-bench row we still cite

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Claude Opus 4.5 matchups →|All Llama 3.1 405B matchups →
Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4 (previous opus)Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 (next opus)Llama 3.1 405B vs Llama 3.1 70B (next llama)Claude Sonnet 5 vs Claude Opus 4.5Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Opus 4.5Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.5