// head_to_head

Claude Opus 5.5 vs o3 Mini High

Published LiveBench scores across all seven categories, live list pricing, context windows, and the measured cost of a point of capability — for both models, side by side.

OpenRouter + LiveBenchAll comparisonsFull leaderboard

o3 Mini High is the cheaper of the two; neither can be ranked on quality here.

o3 Mini High does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

anthropic

Claude Opus 5.5

Blended / 1M
$8.00
Context
1M
Released
Sep 22, 2026
Overall score
83.2
reasoningtool callingimage inputfile inputprompt caching

openai

o3 Mini High

Blended / 1M
$1.93
Context
200K
Released
Feb 12, 2025
Overall score
Not evaluated
reasoningtool callingfile inputprompt caching

Specs and pricing

MetricClaude Opus 5.5o3 Mini High
LiveBench overall

Mean of the seven LiveBench category scores, 0–100. Higher is better.

83.2
Cost per point

Measured benchmark spend divided by overall score — dollars per point of capability.

$0.4474
Blended price / 1M

3:1 input:output mix, the usual shape of production traffic.

$8.00$1.93win
Input price / 1M$4.00$1.10win
Output price / 1M$20.00$4.40win
Cached input / 1M

Price of an input token served from the prompt cache, where the provider publishes one.

$0.200win$0.550
Context window1Mwin200K
Max output tokens128Kwin100K

Benchmarks by category

An overall score averages away the thing you probably care about. These are the seven LiveBench categories scored separately — Claude Opus 5.5 on top, o3 Mini High below, both out of 100.

Agentic coding
71.7
Coding
89.3
Reasoning
92.2
Mathematics
97.1
Data analysis
80.3
Language
86.3
Instruction following
65.7

What each one costs to run

Per-token prices are hard to feel. These are monthly list costs for both models across five workload shapes, using each provider's published cached-input rate where there is one.

WorkloadClaude Opus 5.5o3 Mini High
Support chatbot

1.2K in / 400 out × 200K requests

$2,286/mo$576.40/mo
RAG assistant

8K in / 600 out × 100K requests

$2,880/mo$924.00/mo
Coding agent

40K in / 4K out × 20K requests

$2,672/mo$924.00/mo
Document extraction

20K in / 1.5K out × 50K requests

$5,310/mo$1,403/mo
Bulk classification

500 in / 20 out × 5M requests

$10,100/mo$2,915/mo
Run these two through the cost calculator

Which should you pick?

You need to fit large documents in one call

Claude Opus 5.5

Wider context window — 1M against 200K.

You are cost-constrained

o3 Mini High

Cheaper on blended list price at $1.93 per million tokens.

Claude Opus 5.5 vs o3 Mini High FAQ

Which is better, Claude Opus 5.5 or o3 Mini High?

o3 Mini High is the cheaper of the two; neither can be ranked on quality here. o3 Mini High does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 cheaper than o3 Mini High?

o3 Mini High is cheaper. On a 3:1 input:output blend, Claude Opus 5.5 lists at $8.00 per million tokens and o3 Mini High at $1.93 — o3 Mini High is 4.2× cheaper. Input and output are priced separately — Claude Opus 5.5 charges $4.00 in and $20.00 out, o3 Mini High charges $1.10 and $4.40 — so the model that looks cheaper flips depending on how output-heavy your workload is.

Does Claude Opus 5.5 or o3 Mini High have a bigger context window?

Claude Opus 5.5 has the larger context window: 1M for Claude Opus 5.5 against 200K for o3 Mini High. Note that a window you can fill is not a window you should fill — retrieval quality usually degrades well before the limit, and you pay for every token you put in it.

Do Claude Opus 5.5 and o3 Mini High support prompt caching?

Both publish a cached-input rate: $0.200 per million for Claude Opus 5.5 and $0.550 for o3 Mini High, against full input rates of $4.00 and $1.10. On a workload with a long stable prefix — a system prompt, a tool schema, a retrieved corpus — that changes the economics more than the headline price does.

Related comparisons

How these numbers are produced

  • Price — provider list price from OpenRouter, refreshed every 15 minutes. “Blended” is a 3:1 input:output mix.
  • ScoresLiveBench release 2026-06-25, using their own category map. Each model shows its strongest published run. A blank means “not evaluated”, never “bad”.
  • Cost per point — the measured dollars LiveBench spent on the run, divided by the score it earned.
  • “Win” — awarded only past a threshold: one full point on a benchmark score, 10% on a price, 25% on a context window. Anything tighter reports as a tie, because effort settings alone move a LiveBench score by more than that.

Published benchmarks rank models on someone else's tasks. Before committing, see LLM & agent evaluation for building an eval on your own.