LLM Reference

Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-5.3-Codex

Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.3-Codex are the direct 2026 API-model choice for agentic software engineering. Opus is the stronger high-autonomy pick: it leads on SWE-bench Pro, SWE-bench Verified, OSWorld computer use, provider breadth, and 1M-token context. GPT-5.3-Codex is the lower-cost OpenAI-native option, with a narrow Terminal-Bench 2.0 edge and first-class fit for teams already standardized on Codex CLI and OpenAI API workflows.

Pick Claude Opus 4.8 for autonomous repo work, complex multi-file engineering, computer-use agents, and long-context sessions: it leads GPT-5.3-Codex by 12.4 points on SWE-bench Pro and 18.7 points on OSWorld, with 1M context versus 400K. Pick GPT-5.3-Codex for cost-sensitive coding pipelines, OpenAI-native Codex workflows, and terminal automation where its $1.75/M input price and 77.3% Terminal-Bench 2.0 score matter more than the harder agent benchmarks.

Decision scorecard

Local evidence first
SignalClaude Opus 4.8GPT-5.3-Codex
Product typeStandalone API modelCoding-specialized model
Best forreasoning-heavy apps, multimodal apps, and tool-calling agentscustom coding agents, code generation, and tool loops
Decision fitCoding, RAG, and AgentsCoding, RAG, and Agents
Context window1m400k
Cheapest output$25/1M tokens$14/1M tokens
Provider routes6 tracked3 tracked
Shared benchmarksSWE-bench Verified leader2 shared

Decision tradeoffs

Choose Claude Opus 4.8 when...
  • Claude Opus 4.8 holds a shared-benchmark lead on SWE-bench Verified, ahead by 3.6 points.
  • Claude Opus 4.8 has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
  • Claude Opus 4.8 has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
  • Claude Opus 4.8 uniquely exposes Multimodal and Parallel agents in local model data.
  • Local decision data tags Claude Opus 4.8 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Choose GPT-5.3-Codex when...
  • GPT-5.3-Codex has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $14/1M tokens.
  • Local decision data tags GPT-5.3-Codex for Coding, RAG, and Agents.

Monthly cost at traffic

Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.

Lower estimate GPT-5.3-Codex

Claude Opus 4.8

$10,250

Cheapest tracked route/tier: Anthropic

GPT-5.3-Codex

$4,900

Cheapest tracked route/tier: OpenRouter

Estimated monthly gap: $5,350. Batch, cache, alternate speed tiers, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.

Switch friction

Claude Opus 4.8 -> GPT-5.3-Codex
  • Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter and Vercel AI Gateway; start route-level A/B tests there.
  • GPT-5.3-Codex is $11/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
  • Check replacement coverage for Multimodal and Parallel agents before moving production traffic.
GPT-5.3-Codex -> Claude Opus 4.8
  • Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter and Vercel AI Gateway; start route-level A/B tests there.
  • Claude Opus 4.8 is $11/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
  • Claude Opus 4.8 adds Multimodal and Parallel agents in local capability data.

Specs

Specification
Released2026-05-282026-02-05
Context window1m400k
Parameters
ArchitectureDecoder OnlyDecoder Only
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
OpennessProprietaryProprietary
WeightsNot releasedNot released
CodeNot releasedUnknown
Commercial useCommercial use: conditionalCommercial use: conditional
Knowledge cutoff2026-012025-08

Pricing and availability

Pricing attributeClaude Opus 4.8GPT-5.3-Codex
Input price$5/1M tokens$1.75/1M tokens
Output price$25/1M tokens$14/1M tokens
Providers

Capabilities

CapabilityClaude Opus 4.8GPT-5.3-Codex
VisionYesYes
MultimodalYesNo
ReasoningYesYes
Function callingYesYes
Tool useYesYes
Structured outputsYesYes
Code executionYesYes
IDE integrationNoNo
Computer useYesYes
Parallel agentsYesNo

Benchmarks

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-5.3-Codex
SWE-bench Verified88.685.0
SWE-bench Pro69.256.8

Deep dive

The cleanest coding-agent signal favors Opus. Claude Opus 4.8 scores 69.2% on SWE-bench Pro versus 56.8% for GPT-5.3-Codex, and 88.6% on SWE-bench Verified versus 85.0%. Treat SWE-bench Pro as the more important row for production decisions because it is the harder, more contamination-resistant benchmark in the DAT-5924 handoff.

Computer-use and long-context work also favor Opus. Opus has an 83.4% OSWorld-Verified row, API-level computer-use tooling, dynamic multi-agent workflows through Claude Code, and a 1M-token context window. GPT-5.3-Codex now has the computer-use flag because its OSWorld score is sourced at 64.7%, but its documented context ceiling is 400K and its computer-use surface is oriented around Codex agent loops rather than a comparable API tool parameter.

GPT-5.3-Codex still has two practical wins. First, it is materially cheaper on standard OpenAI pricing at $1.75/M input and $14/M output, compared with Opus standard pricing at $5/M input and $25/M output. Second, it edges Opus on the same Terminal-Bench 2.0 leaderboard, 77.3% versus 74.6%, which matters for shell-heavy CI, local automation, and terminal agent loops.

The provider decision is not symmetrical. Opus is available across Anthropic API, AWS Bedrock, Google Vertex AI, Microsoft Foundry, OpenRouter, and Vercel AI Gateway, which helps enterprise procurement and multi-cloud routing. GPT-5.3-Codex is simpler for OpenAI-standardized teams because the same model ID works through the OpenAI API and Codex tooling, with OpenRouter and Vercel routes for aggregation.

FAQ

Which is better for autonomous coding agents?

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger default for autonomous coding agents. It leads GPT-5.3-Codex on SWE-bench Pro by 12.4 points and on SWE-bench Verified by 3.6 points, and it has the broader computer-use and long-context surface.

When should I choose GPT-5.3-Codex instead?

Choose GPT-5.3-Codex when token cost, OpenAI platform fit, Codex CLI workflows, or terminal automation are the deciding factors. Its standard input price is $1.75/M versus $5/M for Opus, and it narrowly leads on Terminal-Bench 2.0.

Are the Terminal-Bench scores directly comparable?

Use the Terminal-Bench 2.0 rows for a direct comparison: GPT-5.3-Codex scores 77.3% and Claude Opus 4.8 scores 74.6% on the same independent leaderboard. Do not compare GPT-5.3-Codex's 2.0 row against Opus 4.8's separate Terminal-Bench 2.1 launch row.

Which model is better for computer use?

Claude Opus 4.8 is better for computer use in the sourced data. It scores 83.4% on OSWorld-Verified versus 64.7% for GPT-5.3-Codex, and Anthropic exposes a more explicit computer-use API surface.

Continue comparing

Last reviewed: 2026-06-29. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.