Claude Opus 4.6 vs GPT-5.2: Complete Comparison 2026
Quick Verdict:
Claude Opus 4.6 leads overall (9.5 vs 9.4), dominating in coding (9.8 vs 9.5), instruction following (9.9 vs 9.5), and creative writing (9.5 vs 9.0). It also has a 4x larger context window (1M vs 256K). GPT-5.2 retains its edge in pure reasoning (9.8 vs 9.6) and is 50% cheaper on input tokens ($2.50 vs $5.00).
The two most powerful AI models face off. Compare Anthropic's Claude Opus 4.6 and OpenAI's GPT-5.2 side-by-side with live testing.
Claude Opus 4.6
#1 Overall — 9.5/10- Best-in-class coding (9.8/10)
- 1M token context window
- Multi-agent workflow support
- $5.00/1M input, $25.00/1M output
GPT-5.2
#2 Overall — 9.4/10- Best reasoning scores (9.8/10)
- 256K token context
- Multimodal capabilities
- $2.50/1M input, $10.00/1M output
Head-to-Head Comparison
| Feature | Claude Opus 4.6 | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 9.5/10 | 9.4/10 |
| Coding | 9.8/10 | 9.5/10 |
| Reasoning | 9.6/10 | 9.8/10 |
| Creativity | 9.5/10 | 9.0/10 |
| Instruction Following | 9.9/10 | 9.5/10 |
| Context Window | 1,000,000 tokens | 256,000 tokens |
| Cost (per 1M input) | $5.00 | $2.50 |
| Cost (per 1M output) | $25.00 | $10.00 |
| Speed | ~65 tokens/sec | ~85 tokens/sec |
Which Model Should You Choose?
Choose Claude Opus 4.6 for:
- •Advanced coding and software engineering
- •Large codebase analysis (1M context)
- •Multi-agent AI workflows
- •Creative writing and content creation
- •Complex instruction following
Choose GPT-5.2 for:
- •Complex reasoning and analysis
- •Budget-sensitive production deployments
- •Multimodal applications
- •Speed-critical applications
- •Scientific research and mathematics
Try Both Models Side-by-Side
Don't just take our word for it. Test Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.2 with your own prompts and see which performs better for your use case.
Detailed Analysis: Claude Opus 4.6 vs GPT-5.2
Coding and Software Engineering
Claude Opus 4.6 represents a significant leap in AI-assisted coding. With a coding score of 9.8/10, it outperforms GPT-5.2's 9.5/10 across our testing suite. The improvement is most noticeable in complex debugging scenarios, multi-file refactoring, and architectural analysis. The 1M token context window means you can feed entire repositories for analysis — something that was previously impossible without chunking.
Reasoning and Analysis
GPT-5.2 retains its crown for pure reasoning tasks with a 9.8/10 score vs Opus 4.6's 9.6/10. In mathematical proofs, logical deductions, and multi-step analytical problems, GPT-5.2 demonstrates marginally better performance. However, the gap has narrowed significantly from previous generations, and for most practical reasoning tasks, both models perform exceptionally well.
Cost Considerations
GPT-5.2 holds a clear pricing advantage at $2.50/$10.00 per 1M tokens vs Opus 4.6's $5.00/$25.00. For organizations processing large volumes, this translates to significant savings. A typical enterprise processing 100M tokens monthly would pay $175 with GPT-5.2 (70/30 input/output split) versus $475 with Opus 4.6 — a 63% cost difference.
However, if Opus 4.6's superior coding and instruction following capabilities reduce the number of iterations needed to achieve results, the total cost of ownership may be comparable or even lower.
Context Window
Opus 4.6's 1M token context window is nearly 4x larger than GPT-5.2's 256K. This is a decisive advantage for use cases involving large codebases, comprehensive document analysis, or multi-document synthesis. While GPT-5.2's 256K context is sufficient for most tasks, Opus 4.6 eliminates the need for chunking strategies entirely.
Multi-Agent and Agentic Capabilities
Opus 4.6 introduces native multi-agent support, allowing it to orchestrate teams of sub-agents for complex workflows. This makes it uniquely suited for building AI systems that involve task delegation, parallel processing, and result synthesis. GPT-5.2 supports agentic use cases through its API but lacks the same level of native orchestration support.
FAQ: Claude Opus 4.6 vs GPT-5.2
Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.2?
Claude Opus 4.6 is better for coding with a 9.8/10 score vs GPT-5.2's 9.5/10. It excels at large codebase analysis (1M context), complex debugging, and multi-file refactoring. GPT-5.2 is better for algorithm design and competitive programming.
Is GPT-5.2 cheaper than Claude Opus 4.6?
Yes, GPT-5.2 is significantly cheaper. Input tokens cost $2.50 vs $5.00 (50% less), and output tokens cost $10.00 vs $25.00 (60% less). For high-volume use cases, GPT-5.2 offers substantial cost savings.
Which model has a larger context window?
Claude Opus 4.6 has a 1M token context window, nearly 4x larger than GPT-5.2's 256K. For very long documents or large codebases, Opus 4.6 is the clear choice.
Which is faster, Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.2?
GPT-5.2 is faster at approximately 85 tokens/second vs Opus 4.6's 65 tokens/second. For latency-sensitive applications, GPT-5.2 has the edge.
Conclusion
Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.2 are both exceptional models, and the best choice depends on your priorities. Choose Opus 4.6 for coding, agentic workflows, and large context needs. Choose GPT-5.2 for reasoning, cost efficiency, and speed. The best approach is to test both with your actual use cases using prompt-compare to make data-driven decisions.