RankingClaude Opus 5.5

Claude Opus 5.5

Compare models

Data updated 31 Oct 2026

51 published benchmark measures · 1 benchmark families contribute across 1 task areas. 1 capability estimates available in the full profile. See all results ↓ · Compare published benchmarks →

Model evidence summary

This profile combines published settings. It is not a runnable configuration or a leaderboard rank. Compare measured configurations →

Performance profile

Capabilities

Adjusted comparison score · 0–100
Claude Opus 5.5 capability radarComparison scores from 0 to 100. Unknown capabilities have no point; lines stop at gaps. Hollow points are preliminary. Exact values and support labels follow the chart.AgenticHard reasoningCodingHuman prefKnowledgeMultimodalLong context50100Claude Opus 5.5 · Hard reasoning: 83.8 · Preliminary

Filled points are supported; hollow points are preliminary. Lines stop at unknown capabilities. Exact values and sources follow below.

AgenticNo comparable evidenceUnknown

0 core families; 0 direct opponents across 0 labs. No admitted core comparisons

Estimated against the same complete panel: gpt-5.6-sol claude-opus-4-8 gemini-3.1-pro . Indirect comparisons assume performance can be summarized by one strength within this capability.

Refit without one family: No supported estimate; 13/13 scenarios unsupported. Without one publisher: No supported estimate; 15/15 unsupported. Smoothing check: No supported estimate; 3/3 unsupported. These are sensitivity checks, not confidence intervals.

Audit: family and publisher holdouts improved on neutral predictions within evaluated coverage; source sensitivity still requires inspection. Validation audit.

Matched family win shares below describe source evidence; they are not averaged to produce the adjusted score.

    Hard reasoning1 families · 1 with independent evidence · Preliminary83.8

    1 core families; 59 direct opponents across 10 labs. Needs broader benchmark and opponent support

    Estimated against the same complete panel: gpt-5.6-sol claude-opus-4-8 gemini-3.1-pro . Indirect comparisons assume performance can be summarized by one strength within this capability.

    Refit without one family: No supported estimate; 6/6 scenarios unsupported. Without one publisher: No supported estimate; 16/16 unsupported. Smoothing check: No supported estimate; 3/3 unsupported. These are sensitivity checks, not confidence intervals.

    Audit: family and publisher holdouts improved on neutral predictions within evaluated coverage. Validation audit.

    Matched family win shares below describe source evidence; they are not averaged to produce the adjusted score.

    • ARC-AGI: 96.6 observed win share
      arcprize.org · Source 1
    CodingNo comparable evidenceUnknown

    0 core families; 0 direct opponents across 0 labs. No admitted core comparisons

    Estimated against the same complete panel: gpt-5.6-sol claude-opus-4-8 gemini-3.1-pro . Indirect comparisons assume performance can be summarized by one strength within this capability.

    Refit without one family: No supported estimate; 6/6 scenarios unsupported. Without one publisher: No supported estimate; 19/19 unsupported. Smoothing check: No supported estimate; 3/3 unsupported. These are sensitivity checks, not confidence intervals.

    Audit: family and publisher holdouts improved on neutral predictions within evaluated coverage. Validation audit.

    Matched family win shares below describe source evidence; they are not averaged to produce the adjusted score.

      Human prefNo comparable evidenceUnknown

      0 core families; 0 direct opponents across 0 labs. No admitted core comparisons

      Estimated against the same complete panel: gpt-5.6-sol claude-opus-4-8 gemini-3.1-pro . Indirect comparisons assume performance can be summarized by one strength within this capability.

      Refit without one family: No supported estimate; 1/1 scenarios unsupported. Without one publisher: No supported estimate; 1/1 unsupported. Smoothing check: No supported estimate; 3/3 unsupported. These are sensitivity checks, not confidence intervals.

      Audit: cross-family and cross-publisher predictions could not be evaluated from the available comparison network. Validation audit.

      Matched family win shares below describe source evidence; they are not averaged to produce the adjusted score.

        KnowledgeNo comparable evidenceUnknown

        0 core families; 0 direct opponents across 0 labs. No admitted core comparisons

        Estimated against the same complete panel: gpt-5.6-sol claude-opus-4-8 gemini-3.1-pro . Indirect comparisons assume performance can be summarized by one strength within this capability.

        Refit without one family: No supported estimate; 4/4 scenarios unsupported. Without one publisher: No supported estimate; 5/5 unsupported. Smoothing check: No supported estimate; 3/3 unsupported. These are sensitivity checks, not confidence intervals.

        Audit: almost no publisher-held-out comparisons remained estimable. Cross-source validity is unresolved. Validation audit.

        Matched family win shares below describe source evidence; they are not averaged to produce the adjusted score.

          MultimodalNo comparable evidenceUnknown

          0 core families; 0 direct opponents across 0 labs. No admitted core comparisons

          Estimated against the same complete panel: gpt-5.6-sol claude-opus-4-8 gemini-3.1-pro . Indirect comparisons assume performance can be summarized by one strength within this capability.

          Refit without one family: No supported estimate; 8/8 scenarios unsupported. Without one publisher: No supported estimate; 8/8 unsupported. Smoothing check: No supported estimate; 3/3 unsupported. These are sensitivity checks, not confidence intervals.

          Audit: limited publisher-held-out coverage. Cross-source validity is unresolved. Validation audit.

          Matched family win shares below describe source evidence; they are not averaged to produce the adjusted score.

            Long contextNo comparable evidenceUnknown

            0 core families; 0 direct opponents across 0 labs. No admitted core comparisons

            Estimated against the same complete panel: gpt-5.6-sol claude-opus-4-8 gemini-3.1-pro . Indirect comparisons assume performance can be summarized by one strength within this capability.

            Refit without one family: No supported estimate; 5/5 scenarios unsupported. Without one publisher: No supported estimate; 5/5 unsupported. Smoothing check: No supported estimate; 3/3 unsupported. These are sensitivity checks, not confidence intervals.

            Audit: family and publisher holdouts underperformed neutral predictions. Treat this as an exploratory estimate. Validation audit.

            Matched family win shares below describe source evidence; they are not averaged to produce the adjusted score.

              Scores estimate outcomes against a shared reference panel; they are not accuracy percentages. Sparse or disconnected evidence cannot qualify an overall profile. Open a capability to inspect its evidence.

              Reported effort · Mixed settings

              Settings reported in this model's published benchmark results, including results outside the aggregate. Effort names are provider-specific. These are not API defaults or equal compute budgets.

              Mixed settings means multiple settings occur in the evidence. Best across efforts means the source selected its best reported result across settings; it does not mean Max. Unspecified settings stay unknown. This model-summary chart combines reported settings. The leaderboard keeps identified configurations separate and excludes unknown effort.

              Inspect each result and its source ↓ · Download effort evidence
              Score contributions and missing evidence

              1 contributing families across 1 capabilities. Fixed reference panels do not change when the catalog expands.

              Capability is fitted jointly across families. Capability estimates below describe different task areas; their weighted sum is not the Capability score.

              Results without reviewed compatibility or a reference match remain in the raw evidence below. Coverage counts only contributing results.

              Model information & shareable badge
              Lab
              Anthropic
              Catalog status
              active
              Availability
              Public provider catalog; account and region restrictions may apply
              Family
              Claude Opus
              Released
              2026-09-22
              Context
              1,000,000 tokens
              API list price
              $4 input / $20 output per million tokens
              License
              proprietary
              Model card
              https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/models/opus-5-5/overview
              Default Capability family coverage
              Documented-evidence family coverage/badge/claude-opus-5-5.svg
              Benchmark scores & sources

              Original results, evaluation harnesses, and evidence behind this model.

              BenchmarkBucketScoreHarnessEvidenceSource-recorded date
              GraphWalks · up to 128K BFS F1Supporting evidence90.6%
              Reported settings & source

              Comparator maximum available thinking/reasoning when reported, otherwise best available result; exact setting not identified by this grid. All models self-computed. 650 items with context length up to 128K tokens. BFS F1, not pass rate.

              Provider-published launch claim, not independent measurement by Google for every row. All models self-computed. 650 items with context length up to 128K tokens. BFS F1, not pass rate. Methodology https://deepmind.google/models/evals-methodology/gemini-4-argon, SHA256 ff1df6bdeddc4c0f48840c09a8a7813b10ae7ad9e053892da68dabf64f09bff7. Preserve source rounding. Methodology says capabilities as of September 2026 and results as of October 2026; review date is source retrieval, not evaluation date.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published claim. Independent source results are admitted separately with exact checkpoint, effort and compatible protocol; this grid does not establish a matched comparison.

              Google Gemini 4 Argon launch and evaluation methodology · Launch grid row 13: GraphWalks up to 128K BFS F1 / Claude Opus 5.5; methodology Additional Details · reviewed 2026-09-30

              Published configuration

              Effort: Not specified

              lab self-report

              Provider-published claim. Independent source results are admitted separately with exact checkpoint, effort and compatible protocol; this grid does not establish a matched comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-30
              Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark · 1Supporting evidence3.8%
              Reported settings & source

              Comparator maximum available thinking/reasoning when reported, otherwise best available result; exact setting not identified by this grid. Results sourced from Vals AI.

              Provider-published launch claim, not independent measurement by Google for every row. Results sourced from Vals AI. Methodology https://deepmind.google/models/evals-methodology/gemini-4-argon, SHA256 ff1df6bdeddc4c0f48840c09a8a7813b10ae7ad9e053892da68dabf64f09bff7. Preserve source rounding. Methodology says capabilities as of September 2026 and results as of October 2026; review date is source retrieval, not evaluation date.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published claim. Independent source results are admitted separately with exact checkpoint, effort and compatible protocol; this grid does not establish a matched comparison.

              Google Gemini 4 Argon launch and evaluation methodology · Launch grid row 4: Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark 1 / Claude Opus 5.5; methodology Additional Details · reviewed 2026-09-30

              Published configuration

              Effort: Not specified

              lab self-report

              Provider-published claim. Independent source results are admitted separately with exact checkpoint, effort and compatible protocol; this grid does not establish a matched comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-30
              HealthBenchSupporting evidence68.1%
              Reported settings & source

              Raw rubric score; adaptive thinking at max effort; five trials; no tools or custom system prompt; Opus 4.8 grader; safety classifiers with refusal fallback to Opus 5.

              Provider-published lab self-report from the Claude Opus 5.5 system card (SHA256 7311c9c6bbb16d012f1c12c7418b05949fcf7ae3e30d2c40f22050074b2a7378). Not an independent board.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Claude Opus 5.5 System Card · section 8.15.1 · reviewed 2026-09-22

              Published configuration

              Effort: Max

              lab self-report

              Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-22
              HealthBenchSupporting evidence60.6%
              Reported settings & source

              Length-adjusted score using the GPT-5.5 system-card method; otherwise the raw HealthBench configuration: adaptive max, five trials, no tools, Opus 4.8 grader, safety fallback to Opus 5.

              Provider-published lab self-report from the Claude Opus 5.5 system card (SHA256 7311c9c6bbb16d012f1c12c7418b05949fcf7ae3e30d2c40f22050074b2a7378). Not an independent board.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Claude Opus 5.5 System Card · section 8.15.1 · reviewed 2026-09-22

              Published configuration

              Effort: Max

              lab self-report

              Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-22
              HealthBench ProfessionalSupporting evidence77.1%
              Reported settings & source

              Raw rubric score; adaptive thinking at max effort; five trials; no tools or custom system prompt; Opus 4.8 grader; safety classifiers with refusal fallback to Opus 5.

              Provider-published lab self-report from the Claude Opus 5.5 system card (SHA256 7311c9c6bbb16d012f1c12c7418b05949fcf7ae3e30d2c40f22050074b2a7378). Not an independent board.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Claude Opus 5.5 System Card · section 8.15.2 · reviewed 2026-09-22

              Published configuration

              Effort: Max

              lab self-report

              Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-22
              HealthBench ProfessionalSupporting evidence65.6%
              Reported settings & source

              Length-adjusted score using the HealthBench Professional paper method; adaptive max; five trials; no tools; Opus 4.8 grader; safety fallback to Opus 5.

              Provider-published lab self-report from the Claude Opus 5.5 system card (SHA256 7311c9c6bbb16d012f1c12c7418b05949fcf7ae3e30d2c40f22050074b2a7378). Not an independent board. Table 8.1.A's 65.6 is this length-adjusted score, not the raw 77.1%.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Claude Opus 5.5 System Card · Table 8.1.A; section 8.15.2 · reviewed 2026-09-22

              Published configuration

              Effort: Max

              lab self-report

              Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-22
              Humanity’s Last ExamHard reasoning64.4%
              Reported settings & source

              Full 2,500 questions; no tools; section 8.11.1 sets thinking to auto, a 1M total token cap, no compaction, and an Opus 4.6 grader.

              Provider-published lab self-report from the Claude Opus 5.5 system card (SHA256 7311c9c6bbb16d012f1c12c7418b05949fcf7ae3e30d2c40f22050074b2a7378). Not an independent board. Table 8.1.A's default note says adaptive max effort unless otherwise noted. Section 8.11.1 states thinking was set to auto for these runs.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Claude Opus 5.5 System Card · Table 8.1.A; section 8.11.1 · reviewed 2026-09-22

              Published configuration

              Effort: Auto thinking

              lab self-report

              Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-22
              Humanity’s Last ExamHard reasoning67.7%
              Reported settings & source

              Full 2,500 questions; web search, web fetch, programmatic tool calling, and code execution; thinking set to auto; 1M total token cap; no compaction; Opus 4.6 grader; HLE source blocklist and contamination review.

              Provider-published lab self-report from the Claude Opus 5.5 system card (SHA256 7311c9c6bbb16d012f1c12c7418b05949fcf7ae3e30d2c40f22050074b2a7378). Not an independent board. Launch grid shows 67.7% with tools.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Claude Opus 5.5 System Card · Table 8.1.A; section 8.11.1 · reviewed 2026-09-22

              Published configuration

              Effort: Auto thinking

              lab self-report

              Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-22
              Humanity's Sixth SenseSupporting evidence44.6%HSS · xhigh

              Effort: xhigh

              Reported settings

              Full 522-task pass@1, task mean of three attempts; every rubric criterion must pass. 95% task-cluster bootstrap CI. Claude-Opus-5 judge. Scale AI + Elorian. Unversioned board; source hashes identify captures. Display only. Excluded from weighted Overall. Source-recorded date is the capture date, not a proven evaluation date.

              official board

              Supporting evidence outside the reviewed capability core

              2026-10-31
              LABBench · 2Supporting evidence73.1%
              Reported settings & source

              Comparator maximum available thinking/reasoning when reported, otherwise best available result; exact setting not identified by this grid. All models self-computed with Linux terminal, pre-installed bioinformatics tools, Python, R and internet access.

              Provider-published launch claim, not independent measurement by Google for every row. All models self-computed with Linux terminal, pre-installed bioinformatics tools, Python, R and internet access. Methodology https://deepmind.google/models/evals-methodology/gemini-4-argon, SHA256 ff1df6bdeddc4c0f48840c09a8a7813b10ae7ad9e053892da68dabf64f09bff7. Preserve source rounding. Methodology says capabilities as of September 2026 and results as of October 2026; review date is source retrieval, not evaluation date.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published claim. Independent source results are admitted separately with exact checkpoint, effort and compatible protocol; this grid does not establish a matched comparison.

              Google Gemini 4 Argon launch and evaluation methodology · Launch grid row 11: LABBench 2 / Claude Opus 5.5; methodology Additional Details · reviewed 2026-09-30

              Published configuration

              Effort: Not specified

              lab self-report

              Provider-published claim. Independent source results are admitted separately with exact checkpoint, effort and compatible protocol; this grid does not establish a matched comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-30
              Legal Agent Benchmark · 120-task held-out subsetSupporting evidence8.3%
              Reported settings & source

              All-pass rate on Harvey's held-out 120 tasks; max effort. Artificial Analysis harness, as in the previous system card.

              Provider-published lab self-report from the Claude Opus 5.5 system card (SHA256 7311c9c6bbb16d012f1c12c7418b05949fcf7ae3e30d2c40f22050074b2a7378). Not an independent board.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Claude Opus 5.5 System Card · section 8.14.2 · reviewed 2026-09-22

              Published configuration

              Effort: Max

              lab self-report

              Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-22
              Legal Agent Benchmark · 120-task held-out subsetSupporting evidence91.2%
              Reported settings & source

              Mean criterion-pass rate on Harvey's held-out 120 tasks; max effort. Artificial Analysis harness, as in the previous system card.

              Provider-published lab self-report from the Claude Opus 5.5 system card (SHA256 7311c9c6bbb16d012f1c12c7418b05949fcf7ae3e30d2c40f22050074b2a7378). Not an independent board.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Claude Opus 5.5 System Card · section 8.14.2 · reviewed 2026-09-22

              Published configuration

              Effort: Max

              lab self-report

              Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-22
              LMArena Agent ArenaSupporting evidence20.94 LMArena Agent Arena · max

              Effort: Not specified

              official board

              Supporting evidence outside the reviewed capability core

              2026-10-28
              LMArena Agent ArenaSupporting evidence14.33 LMArena Agent Arena · high

              Effort: Not specified

              official board

              Supporting evidence outside the reviewed capability core

              2026-10-08
              LVBenchMultimodal83.7%
              Reported settings & source

              Comparator maximum available thinking/reasoning when reported, otherwise best available result; exact setting not identified by this grid. All models self-computed without tools. Gemini 1 FPS; Astra 800 frames, Fable 300 frames and Opus 600 frames due to API limits. Unequal frame budgets are excluded from matched comparison.

              Provider-published launch claim, not independent measurement by Google for every row. All models self-computed without tools. Gemini 1 FPS; Astra 800 frames, Fable 300 frames and Opus 600 frames due to API limits. Unequal frame budgets are excluded from matched comparison. Methodology https://deepmind.google/models/evals-methodology/gemini-4-argon, SHA256 ff1df6bdeddc4c0f48840c09a8a7813b10ae7ad9e053892da68dabf64f09bff7. Preserve source rounding. Methodology says capabilities as of September 2026 and results as of October 2026; review date is source retrieval, not evaluation date.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published claim. Independent source results are admitted separately with exact checkpoint, effort and compatible protocol; this grid does not establish a matched comparison.

              Google Gemini 4 Argon launch and evaluation methodology · Launch grid row 18: LVBench / Claude Opus 5.5; methodology Additional Details · reviewed 2026-09-30

              Published configuration

              Effort: Not specified

              lab self-report

              Provider-published claim. Independent source results are admitted separately with exact checkpoint, effort and compatible protocol; this grid does not establish a matched comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-30
              MILUKnowledge93.1%
              Reported settings & source

              Average accuracy across 11 languages; adaptive thinking at max effort; five trials; no tools or custom system prompt.

              Provider-published lab self-report from the Claude Opus 5.5 system card (SHA256 7311c9c6bbb16d012f1c12c7418b05949fcf7ae3e30d2c40f22050074b2a7378). Not an independent board.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Claude Opus 5.5 System Card · section 8.16.2; Figure 8.16.2.A · reviewed 2026-09-22

              Published configuration

              Effort: Max

              lab self-report

              Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-22
              OfficeQAAgentic78.9%
              Reported settings & source

              Agentic extracted-text Treasury Bulletin corpus with code execution; max effort; mean of five runs.

              Provider-published lab self-report from the Claude Opus 5.5 system card (SHA256 7311c9c6bbb16d012f1c12c7418b05949fcf7ae3e30d2c40f22050074b2a7378). Not an independent board.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Claude Opus 5.5 System Card · section 8.14.1 · reviewed 2026-09-22

              Published configuration

              Effort: Max

              lab self-report

              Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-22
              OfficeQA ProAgentic67.7%
              Reported settings & source

              Harder 133-question subset; agentic extracted-text Treasury Bulletin corpus with code execution; max effort; mean of five runs.

              Provider-published lab self-report from the Claude Opus 5.5 system card (SHA256 7311c9c6bbb16d012f1c12c7418b05949fcf7ae3e30d2c40f22050074b2a7378). Not an independent board.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Claude Opus 5.5 System Card · section 8.14.1 · reviewed 2026-09-22

              Published configuration

              Effort: Max

              lab self-report

              Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-22
              OSWorld · 2.0 September 10, 2026 task releaseAgentic81.8%
              Reported settings & source

              Partial score, pass@1; 108 tasks; five runs; 1080p; 500 action steps; max reasoning effort; Opus 4.8 grader where required. September 10, 2026 task files and server-side context compaction after 100k tokens.

              Provider-published lab self-report from the Claude Opus 5.5 system card (SHA256 7311c9c6bbb16d012f1c12c7418b05949fcf7ae3e30d2c40f22050074b2a7378). Not an independent board. Launch grid shows 81.8% partial. Section 8.13.3 says these settings supersede the Fable 5.1 card's OSWorld 2.0 figures.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Claude Opus 5.5 System Card · Table 8.1.A; section 8.13.3 · reviewed 2026-09-22

              Published configuration

              Effort: Max

              lab self-report

              Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-22
              OSWorld · 2.0 September 10, 2026 task releaseAgentic48.7%
              Reported settings & source

              Strict pass rate, pass@1; 108 tasks; five runs; 1080p; 500 action steps; max reasoning effort; Opus 4.8 grader where required. September 10, 2026 task files and server-side context compaction after 100k tokens.

              Provider-published lab self-report from the Claude Opus 5.5 system card (SHA256 7311c9c6bbb16d012f1c12c7418b05949fcf7ae3e30d2c40f22050074b2a7378). Not an independent board. Table 8.1.A prints partial/strict as 81.8/48.7. This row is the strict pass rate.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Claude Opus 5.5 System Card · Table 8.1.A; section 8.13.3 · reviewed 2026-09-22

              Published configuration

              Effort: Max

              lab self-report

              Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-22
              PostTrainBench · 1.1Supporting evidence49.3%
              Reported settings & source

              Comparator maximum available thinking/reasoning when reported, otherwise best available result; exact setting not identified by this grid. All models self-computed; OpenCode harness; 10-hour budget on one NVIDIA H100 GPU. Weighted aggregate across four base models and seven benchmarks.

              Provider-published launch claim, not independent measurement by Google for every row. All models self-computed; OpenCode harness; 10-hour budget on one NVIDIA H100 GPU. Weighted aggregate across four base models and seven benchmarks. Methodology https://deepmind.google/models/evals-methodology/gemini-4-argon, SHA256 ff1df6bdeddc4c0f48840c09a8a7813b10ae7ad9e053892da68dabf64f09bff7. Preserve source rounding. Methodology says capabilities as of September 2026 and results as of October 2026; review date is source retrieval, not evaluation date.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published claim. Independent source results are admitted separately with exact checkpoint, effort and compatible protocol; this grid does not establish a matched comparison.

              Google Gemini 4 Argon launch and evaluation methodology · Launch grid row 9: PostTrainBench 1.1 / Claude Opus 5.5; methodology Additional Details · reviewed 2026-09-30

              Published configuration

              Effort: Not specified

              lab self-report

              Provider-published claim. Independent source results are admitted separately with exact checkpoint, effort and compatible protocol; this grid does not establish a matched comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-30
              ProgramBench · 166 golden-task subsetSupporting evidence91.2%
              Reported settings & source

              mini-swe-agent without the six-hour timeout; 34 tasks with a reference binary below 0.9 excluded; scored only on tests the reference binary passes; context up to 1M. Section 8.10.1 does not state reasoning effort.

              Provider-published lab self-report from the Claude Opus 5.5 system card (SHA256 7311c9c6bbb16d012f1c12c7418b05949fcf7ae3e30d2c40f22050074b2a7378). Not an independent board. Hidden-test pass rate, not the fraction of completely solved programs. Effort is not stated in this section.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Claude Opus 5.5 System Card · section 8.10.1 · reviewed 2026-09-22

              Published configuration

              Effort: Not specified

              lab self-report

              Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-22
              RiemannBenchSupporting evidence69.6%
              Reported settings & source

              Comparator maximum available thinking/reasoning when reported, otherwise best available result; exact setting not identified by this grid. Results sourced from the official Surge public leaderboard.

              Provider-published launch claim, not independent measurement by Google for every row. Results sourced from the official Surge public leaderboard. Methodology https://deepmind.google/models/evals-methodology/gemini-4-argon, SHA256 ff1df6bdeddc4c0f48840c09a8a7813b10ae7ad9e053892da68dabf64f09bff7. Preserve source rounding. Methodology says capabilities as of September 2026 and results as of October 2026; review date is source retrieval, not evaluation date.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published claim. Independent source results are admitted separately with exact checkpoint, effort and compatible protocol; this grid does not establish a matched comparison.

              Google Gemini 4 Argon launch and evaluation methodology · Launch grid row 12: RiemannBench / Claude Opus 5.5; methodology Additional Details · reviewed 2026-09-30

              Published configuration

              Effort: Not specified

              lab self-report

              Provider-published claim. Independent source results are admitted separately with exact checkpoint, effort and compatible protocol; this grid does not establish a matched comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-30
              SWE-bench MultilingualCoding93.9%
              Reported settings & source

              Adaptive thinking at max effort; default sampling; five-trial mean; context at most 1M. 300 problems across nine programming languages.

              Provider-published lab self-report from the Claude Opus 5.5 system card (SHA256 7311c9c6bbb16d012f1c12c7418b05949fcf7ae3e30d2c40f22050074b2a7378). Not an independent board. Launch grid shows 93.9%.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Claude Opus 5.5 System Card · Table 8.1.A; section 8.2 · reviewed 2026-09-22

              Published configuration

              Effort: Max

              lab self-report

              Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-22
              SWE-bench MultimodalSupporting evidence61.4%
              Reported settings & source

              Adaptive thinking at max effort; default sampling; five-trial mean; context at most 1M. Visual context added to issue descriptions.

              Provider-published lab self-report from the Claude Opus 5.5 system card (SHA256 7311c9c6bbb16d012f1c12c7418b05949fcf7ae3e30d2c40f22050074b2a7378). Not an independent board.

              Comparison limit: Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Claude Opus 5.5 System Card · Table 8.1.A; section 8.2 · reviewed 2026-09-22

              Published configuration

              Effort: Max

              lab self-report

              Provider-published lab self-report. Shown as a labeled claim and not admitted as a matched board comparison.

              Reviewed 2026-09-22