Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.5 vs Hy3 Preview
Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 #34 (Supported); Hy3 Preview unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.5 and Hy3 Preview share 15 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 44 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.5; 7 to Hy3 Preview.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 15
- Claude Opus 4.5 only
- 44
- Hy3 Preview only
- 7
- Comparable categories
- 4 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Claude Opus 4.5 makes more sense if knowledge is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model; Hy3 Preview is the better fit if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 256K context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 15 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Claude Opus 4.5 and Hy3 Preview 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.
Claude Opus 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Hy3 Preview. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Hy3 Preview is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Opus 4.5 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. Hy3 Preview gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 200K for Claude Opus 4.5.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude Opus 4.5 | Δ | Hy3 Preview |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Claude Opus 4.558.1 | Margin← 24.3 | Hy3 Preview33.8 |
| Coding | Claude Opus 4.571.7 | Margin← 13.9 | Hy3 Preview57.8 |
| Agentic | Claude Opus 4.562.6 | Margin← 8.2 | Hy3 Preview54.4 |
| Inst. Following | Claude Opus 4.569.5 | Margin← 6.4 | Hy3 Preview63.1 |
| Reasoning | Claude Opus 4.564.4 | MarginNo overlap | Hy3 PreviewNot measured |
| Math | Claude Opus 4.557.5 | MarginNo overlap | Hy3 PreviewNot measured |
| Multilingual | Claude Opus 4.585.7 | MarginNo overlap | Hy3 PreviewNot measured |
| Multimodal | Claude Opus 4.569.9 | MarginNo overlap | Hy3 PreviewNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 80.9%B 74.4%Winner: Claude Opus 4.5Δ 6.5SWE-bench Verified: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 80.9%; Hy3 Preview scored 74.4%. Claude Opus 4.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 30.8%B 25.5%Winner: Claude Opus 4.5Δ 5.3HLE: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 30.8%; Hy3 Preview scored 25.5%. Claude Opus 4.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
IFBench
Inst. FollowingA 58%B 63.1%Winner: Hy3 PreviewΔ 5.1IFBench: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 58%; Hy3 Preview scored 63.1%. Hy3 Preview wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 59.3%B 54.4%Winner: Claude Opus 4.5Δ 4.9Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 59.3%; Hy3 Preview scored 54.4%. Claude Opus 4.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 87%B 87.2%Winner: Hy3 PreviewΔ 0.2GPQA: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 87%; Hy3 Preview scored 87.2%. Hy3 Preview wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.5 | Hy3 Preview | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Opus 4.5$5 input / $25 output | Hy3 Preview$0 input / $0 output | Hy3 Preview has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Opus 4.546 tok/s | Hy3 PreviewNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Opus 4.51.01 s | Hy3 PreviewNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Opus 4.5200K | Hy3 Preview256K | Hy3 Preview lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticClaude Opus 4.5 wins19 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Hy3 Preview | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 59.3% | 54.4% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 66.3% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorldSource | 66.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | 59.6% | — | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | 52.3% | — | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | 70.2% | — | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | 23.3% | — | Not comparable |
| DeepPlanningSource | 26.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 43.5% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 42.3% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP-TasksSource | 71.8% | — | Not comparable |
| WideResearchSource | 76.4% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 50.6% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 86.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 64.23% | 36.91% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| JobBenchSource | 32.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 30.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 35.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1214 | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Opus 4.5 wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Hy3 Preview | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 80.9% | 74.4% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| LiveCodeBench v6Source | 84.8% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 57.1% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 77.5% | — | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | 43.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 47.0% | 47.6% | Hy3 Preview leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 54.4% | Not comparable |
| SciCodeSource | — | 41.2% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 58.8% | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.5 wins14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Hy3 Preview | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 87% | 87.2% | Hy3 Preview leads |
| SuperGPQASource | 70.6% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 89.5% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | 96.6% | — | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | 92.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 30.8% | 25.5% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 34.7% | 41.2% | Hy3 Preview leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 81.0% | 89.7% | Hy3 Preview leads |
| AA-HLESource | 12.9% | 31.6% | Hy3 Preview leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -3.9% | -18.5% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 40.7% | 31.5% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 75.4% | 73.0% | Hy3 Preview leads |
| AA MMLU-ProSource | 88.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 87.2% | Not comparable |
Math7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Hy3 Preview | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME26Source | 95.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2025Source | 92.9% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Nov 2025Source | 93.3% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | 85.3% | — | Not comparable |
| MMAnswerBenchSource | 84.0% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | 20.690% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | 4.167% | — | Not comparable |
Multilingual2 benchmarks
Multimodal8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Hy3 Preview | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 70.6% | — | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | 74.3% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 68.5% | — | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | 84.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | 45.7% | — | Not comparable |
| V*Source | 67.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 71.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1277 | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (5)
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.5 or Hy3 Preview?
Claude Opus 4.5 and Hy3 Preview 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 knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or Hy3 Preview?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 58.1 versus 33.8. Inside this category, AA-HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.5 or Hy3 Preview?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 71.7 versus 57.8. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or Hy3 Preview?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 62.6 versus 54.4. Inside this category, Gert Labs is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for instruction following, Claude Opus 4.5 or Hy3 Preview?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 69.5 versus 63.1. Inside this category, IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
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.