Model comparison
Claude 4.1 Opus vs Sakana Fugu-Ultra
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4.1 Opus #142 (Supported); Sakana Fugu-Ultra unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude 4.1 Opus and Sakana Fugu-Ultra share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to Claude 4.1 Opus; 11 to Sakana Fugu-Ultra.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Claude 4.1 Opus only
- 4
- Sakana Fugu-Ultra only
- 11
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Claude 4.1 Opus makes more sense if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model; Sakana Fugu-Ultra is the better fit if you need the larger 1M context window or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Claude 4.1 Opus and Sakana Fugu-Ultra finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Sakana Fugu-Ultra is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude 4.1 Opus is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Sakana Fugu-Ultra gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude 4.1 Opus.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude 4.1 Opus | Sakana Fugu-Ultra | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude 4.1 Opus$15 input / $75 output | Sakana Fugu-UltraNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude 4.1 Opus29 tok/s | Sakana Fugu-UltraNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude 4.1 Opus1.66 s | Sakana Fugu-UltraNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude 4.1 Opus200K | Sakana Fugu-Ultra1M | Sakana Fugu-Ultra lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic2 benchmarks
CodingClaude 4.1 Opus wins6 benchmarks
Reasoning1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | Sakana Fugu-Ultra | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MRCRv2Source | — | 93.6% | Not comparable |
Knowledge4 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude 4.1 Opus or Sakana Fugu-Ultra?
Claude 4.1 Opus and Sakana Fugu-Ultra are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for coding, Claude 4.1 Opus or Sakana Fugu-Ultra?
Claude 4.1 Opus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 74.5 versus 64.5. Sakana Fugu-Ultra stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.