Which is better: GPT-6.1 Terra or Claude Opus 4.8?

Verdict: GPT-6.1 Terra ranks higher (#35 vs #45); GPT-6.1 Terra costs less ($1.00/$5.00 vs $5.00/$25.0 per 1M tokens). AskClash compares GPT-6.1 Terra and Claude Opus 4.8 side by side across SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, coding agent scores, token pricing, AskClash ACB, and context window so you can see which model wins on each benchmark.

How do GPT-6.1 Terra and Claude Opus 4.8 compare on coding benchmarks?

The comparison table shows SWE-bench, SWE-Pro, SWE-Atlas, Terminal-Bench, DeepSWE, and coding agent index scores for both GPT-6.1 Terra and Claude Opus 4.8 when publicly disclosed.

LLM Comparison

GPT-6.1 Terra vs Claude Opus 4.8: benchmark scores, pricing & comparison.

Side-by-side GPT-6.1 Terra vs Claude Opus 4.8 comparison across SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, coding agent scores, token pricing, context window, and AskClash RWT. Green marks the winner on each benchmark.

Verdict: GPT-6.1 Terra ranks higher (#35 vs #45); GPT-6.1 Terra costs less ($1.00/$5.00 vs $5.00/$25.0 per 1M tokens).

Open live leaderboard GPT-6.1 Terra model page Claude Opus 4.8 model page

Rank #35 vs #45AskClash overall scores 61.7 vs 59.4.

Pricing $1.00/$5.00 vs $5.00/$25.0Input and output token prices per 1M tokens when published.

Proprietary vs ProprietaryOpenAI vs Anthropic.

GPT-6.1 Terra vs Claude Opus 4.8 benchmark comparison

Green cells highlight the winning model for each metric. Scores are cached from the AskClash LLM leaderboard snapshot.

Metric	GPT-6.1 Terra	Claude Opus 4.8
Overall Score	61.7	59.4
Leaderboard Rank	#35	#45
ACB	62.1	60.1
RWT	—	9.0
Coding Agent Index	—	72.5
HLE	46.2	57.9
GPQA	—	93.6
IFEval	—	62.2
SWE-bench	—	88.6
SWE-Pro	—	69.2
SWE-Atlas	—	82.5
Terminal-Bench	55.6	21.7
DeepSWE	—	59.0
GDPval-AA	1467.6	1889.8
OSWorld	—	83.4
MCP Atlas	—	82.2
Finance Agent	—	53.9
CharXiv	—	89.9
MMMU-Pro	84.7	—
ARC-AGI 2	—	72.1
Tau2	—	94.4
Input Price (per 1M tokens)	$1.00	$5.00
Output Price (per 1M tokens)	$5.00	$25.0
Context Window	1.05M	1M
Benchmarks Published	8	16

GPT-6.1 Terra vs Claude Opus 4.8 head-to-head charts

GPT-6.1 Terra leads 3 and Claude Opus 4.8 leads 2 of 5 shared benchmarks. GPT-6.1 Terra is cheaper on a defined 1M-input / 200K-output workload. Charts show only benchmarks both models publish.

GPT-6.1 TerraClaude Opus 4.8

Overall

61.7GPT-6.1 Terra

59.4Claude Opus 4.8

ACB

62.1GPT-6.1 Terra

60.1Claude Opus 4.8

HLE

46.2GPT-6.1 Terra

57.9Claude Opus 4.8

Terminal-Bench

55.6GPT-6.1 Terra

21.7Claude Opus 4.8

GDPval-AA

1467.6GPT-6.1 Terra

1889.8Claude Opus 4.8

GPT-6.1 Terra

Input$1.00

Output$5.00

Workload$2.00

Context1.05M

Claude Opus 4.8

Input$5.00

Output$25.0

Workload$10

Context1M

Workload = published cost of 1M input + 200K output tokens. Open the live leaderboard for interactive compare charts.

More GPT-6.1 Terra and Claude Opus 4.8 comparisons

Explore how GPT-6.1 Terra and Claude Opus 4.8 stack up against other top-ranked LLMs.

Kimi K3.1 Pro vs GPT-6.1 Terra Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Claude Opus 4.8 Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Terra Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Opus 4.8 Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-6.1 Terra Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 4.8 Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Terra Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Claude Opus 4.8 Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-6.1 Terra Claude Opus 5 vs Claude Opus 4.8

How to read this comparison

Benchmark scores

Higher is better for all benchmark scores (SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, etc.). Green marks the model with the higher score.

Token pricing

Lower is better for input and output prices. Green marks the cheaper model per 1M tokens.

Coverage matters

Models with fewer disclosed benchmark cells may have inflated percentile scores. Check the benchmark cell count for context.

This comparison page is generated from the AskClash LLM leaderboard cache. Open the live leaderboard for real-time scores and interactive filtering.