Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Sarvam 105B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 11 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

78.34/100
Margin
35.4pts
← winning
42.97/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.8 #5 (Supported); Sarvam 105B #157 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.8 and Sarvam 105B share 11 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 42 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.8; 0 to Sarvam 105B.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
11
Claude Opus 4.8 only
42
Sarvam 105B only
0
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Claude Opus 4.8 and Sarvam 105B is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 11 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

Claude Opus 4.8 is priced at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Sarvam 105B. Claude Opus 4.8 has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Sarvam 105B.

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 scores and score margins for Claude Opus 4.8 and Sarvam 105B
CategoryClaude Opus 4.8ΔSarvam 105B
AgenticClaude Opus 4.880.3MarginNo overlapSarvam 105BNot measured
CodingClaude Opus 4.881.1MarginNo overlapSarvam 105BNot measured
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.862.7MarginNo overlapSarvam 105BNot measured
MathClaude Opus 4.853.9MarginNo overlapSarvam 105BNot measured
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.877.0MarginNo overlapSarvam 105BNot measured

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Opus 4.8Sarvam 105BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.8$5 input / $25 outputSarvam 105B$0 input / $0 outputSarvam 105B has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.8Not availableSarvam 105BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.8Not availableSarvam 105BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.81MSarvam 105B128KClaude Opus 4.8 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Sarvam 105BResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 74.6%—Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 84.3%—Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource 93.1%—Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 83.4%—Not comparable
Finance Agent v2Source 53.9%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1594—Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 82.2%—Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 59.9%—Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 72.97%—Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 47.2%—Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 94.4%46.8%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
GDPval-AASource 54.7%—Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 21.1%—Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 20.6%—Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource 1347—Not comparable
AA AutomationBenchSource 48.5%—Not comparable
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 44.0%—Not comparable
AA Harvey LABSource 91.1%—Not comparable
AA Tau3 BankingSource 27.6%—Not comparable
terminalBenchHardSource 58.3%—Not comparable
aaTerminalBench21Source 84.6%—Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Sarvam 105BResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 88.6%—Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 69.2%—Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 84.4%—Not comparable
SWE MultimodalSource 38.4%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 74.6%—Not comparable
cursorBench31Source 58.4%—Not comparable
cursorBench32Source 62.3%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 74.3%—Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 53.5%26.4%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource 46.5%—Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Sarvam 105BResult
AA-LCRSource 67.7%0.0%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
CritPtSource 20.9%0.0%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Sarvam 105BResult
GPQASource 93.6%—Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 93.6%—Not comparable
HLESource 57.9%—Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 49.8%—Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 55.7%11.9%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 92.0%73.8%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-HLESource 45.7%10.1%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 27.4%-59.5%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 46.6%17.6%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 35.9%93.5%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Math
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Sarvam 105BResult
USAMO 2026Source 96.7%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 47.241%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 31.250%—Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Sarvam 105BResult
INCLUDESource 87.6%—Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Sarvam 105BResult
OfficeQA ProSource 66.2%—Not comparable
ScreenSpot ProSource 87.9%—Not comparable
CharXivSource 89.9%—Not comparable
CharXiv w/o toolsSource 80.5%—Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1270—Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Sarvam 105BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 62.2%34.4%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Claude Opus 4.8 and Sarvam 105B on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for Claude Opus 4.8 and Sarvam 105B today?

Claude Opus 4.8: $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens Sarvam 105B: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Anthropic Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 23, 2026

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.