Claude Opus 4.1 vs Pixtral Large (25.02) vs o3-pro
Pixtral Large (25.02) comes out ahead, 33 to 27 and 27 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
AnthropicClaude Opus 4.1
27/100- ECI144.1
- Price$15.00 / $75.00
- Context200K
- Our pick
Mistral AIPixtral Large (25.02)
33/100- ECI—
- Price$2.00 / $6.00
- Context128K
OpenAIo3-pro
27/100- ECI147.4
- Price$20.00 / $80.00
- Context200K
Pixtral Large (25.02) is our pick
Pixtral Large (25.02) is the better all-round choice, scoring 33/100 against Claude Opus 4.1 (27) and o3-pro (27). It leads on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest pricePixtral Large (25.02)Pixtral Large (25.02) $3.00 · Claude Opus 4.1 $30.00 · o3-pro $35.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextClaude Opus 4.1 and o3-proClaude Opus 4.1 200,000 · o3-pro 200,000 · Pixtral Large (25.02) 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsClaude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.1: Text, Images, PDFs · Pixtral Large (25.02): Text, Images · o3-pro: Text, Images
- Self-hostingNo open weightsAll three are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Claude Opus 4.1 | Pixtral Large (25.02) | o3-pro |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 0 | 27 | 0 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 70 | 50 | 70 |
| Context window | 20% | 32 | 24 | 32 |
| Overall | 100% | 27/100 | 33/100 | 27/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Claude Opus 4.1Anthropic | Pixtral Large (25.02)Mistral AI | o3-proOpenAI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 144.1 | — | 147.4 (best) |
| ECI rank | #81 of 148 | — | #60 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 77.3% | — | — |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 12.6% | — | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 68.9% | — | — |
| SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues | 73.4% | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $15.00 | $2.00 (best) | $20.00 |
| Output | $75.00 | $6.00 (best) | $80.00 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $30.00 | $3.00 (best) | $35.00 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 14 providers | Median of 3 providers | Official OpenAI API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 200,000 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens | 200,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 32,000 tokens | 8,192 tokens | 100,000 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | Yes | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No | Yeslow · medium · high |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | — | o3-pro |
| API providers | 14 (best) | 3 | 6 |
| Released | Aug 5, 2025 | Apr 8, 2025 | Jun 10, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Mar 31, 2025 | — | May 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Claude Opus 4.1$300.00
- Pixtral Large (25.02)$32.00
- o3-pro$360.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Claude Opus 4.1, Pixtral Large (25.02) or o3-pro?
Pixtral Large (25.02) is the better all-round choice, scoring 33/100 against Claude Opus 4.1 (27) and o3-pro (27). It leads on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1, Pixtral Large (25.02) or o3-pro?
Pixtral Large (25.02) is cheaper at $2.00 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15.00 input / $75.00 output per million tokens (median across 14 API providers); o3-pro costs $20.00 input / $80.00 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $3.00 per million tokens for Pixtral Large (25.02) versus $30.00 for Claude Opus 4.1 (10× as much) and $35.00 for o3-pro (12× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Claude Opus 4.1 has an ECI of 144.1, Pixtral Large (25.02) has not been scored yet and o3-pro has an ECI of 147.4.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Pixtral Large (25.02) and o3-pro yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Opus 4.1 and o3-pro have the largest context windows (200,000 and 200,000 tokens), against 128,000 for Pixtral Large (25.02). Maximum output per response: Claude Opus 4.1 up to 32,000, Pixtral Large (25.02) up to 8,192, o3-pro up to 100,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Claude Opus 4.1 accepts text, images and PDFs; Pixtral Large (25.02) accepts text and images; o3-pro accepts text and images. Claude Opus 4.1 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
No. Claude Opus 4.1, Pixtral Large (25.02) and o3-pro are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
Claude Opus 4.1 is the newest, released Aug 5, 2025. o3-pro came out Jun 10, 2025; Pixtral Large (25.02) came out Apr 8, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Opus 4.1 Mar 31, 2025, o3-pro May 2024.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Claude Opus 4.1 vs Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle · ECI 145.3
- Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen3 MaxAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 142.4
- Claude Opus 4.1 vs DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32BDeepSeek · ECI 137.4
- Pixtral Large (25.02) vs Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B InstructAlibaba (Qwen)
- Pixtral Large (25.02) vs Sonar Deep ResearchPerplexity
- Pixtral Large (25.02) vs Jamba LargeAI21 Labs
