Decision summary
- New Opus route -> Claude Opus 5.5
- Client requires computer_20251124 on Claude API or Google Cloud -> stay on Opus 5 until you migrate
- Cache-heavy agents -> Opus 5.5 at $0.20 cache reads
- Need a replay before cutover -> run the same tasks on both IDs
- Lower than Opus prices -> Claude Sonnet 5, not Opus 5
Claude Opus successor comparison
Frontier comparisonClaude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Opus 5
Claude Opus 5.5 replaces Claude Opus 5 as the latest Opus-tier model.
Featured · Updated today · Last verified: September 2026
Choose Claude Opus 5.5 when
Current Opus-tier agents, coding migrations, and knowledge work.
Choose Claude Opus 5 when
Pinned Opus 5 clients until they absorb the Opus 5.5 breaking changes.
- New Opus route: Claude Opus 5.5
- Client requires computer_20251124 on Claude API or Google Cloud: stay on Opus 5 until you migrate
- Cache-heavy agents: Opus 5.5 at $0.20 cache reads
Decision axes: Best for · Access and platforms · Context window · Input and output
Reasoning
Opus 5.5 thinking cannot be disabled. That is a breaking change from Opus 5.
Coding
Anthropic reports higher coding scores and a lower typical bill at default settings.
Multimodal
Text and image in, text out.
Speed
Anthropic says output is more than 30% faster. Treat that as their test, then measure yours.
Enterprise
Same Claude platforms, with computer_20251124 rejected on the Claude API and Google Cloud.
Curated matrix for Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Opus 5 — confirm live limits and pricing on each vendor’s official pages.
How they compare
Criterion-by-criterion notes from the catalog—not a ranking. Validate on your own gold set.
| Criterion | Claude Opus 5.5 | Claude Opus 5 |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | Current Opus-tier agents, coding migrations, and knowledge work. | Pinned Opus 5 clients until they absorb the Opus 5.5 breaking changes. |
| Access and platforms | claude-opus-5-5, released September 22, 2026, on Claude API and major clouds. | claude-opus-5 remains callable; this catalog marks it superseded by Opus 5.5. |
| Context window | 1M context; 128K synchronous output; up to 300K on the Message Batches API with the output-300k beta header. | 1M-class Opus context as previously documented. Confirm the live card before a new build. |
| Input and output | Text and image in; text out. | Text and image in; text out. |
| Reasoning control | Adaptive thinking always on. Default effort medium. Effort steers depth. | Adaptive thinking. Opus 5.5 changes which controls can turn thinking off. |
| Coding and agents | Anthropic reports large gains versus Opus 5 on long coding jobs and says a 680,000-line migration finished in under a day in one early test. | Prior Opus agent default. Anthropic's new table shows lower coding and computer-use scores than Opus 5.5. |
| Cost posture | $4 / $20. Cache read $0.20 (60% below Opus 5). 5-minute cache write $5. | Anthropic's comparison table lists Opus 5 at $5 input / $25 output and $0.50 cache reads per 1M. |
| Operational risk | Four breaking changes versus Opus 5, including thinking that cannot be disabled and rejection of computer_20251124 on the Claude API and Google Cloud. | Staying on Opus 5 avoids the migration, but you pay the higher published rates and miss the speed claim. |
Key insights
Concrete technical or product signals.
- Anthropic's price table is the source for the Opus 5 $5/$25 and $0.50 cache-read figures, not a guessed discount.
- The 40% typical-cost claim is Anthropic's workload test at default settings, not a guarantee for every prompt.
- Early-tester anecdotes, including the 680,000-line migration, are vendor stories, not a benchmark.
Use cases
Where this shines in production.
- Upgrading claude-opus-5
- Estimating the cache-read cut
- Planning the thinking-block migration
Limitations & trade-offs
What to watch for.
- Not a Fable or Sonnet comparison.
- Batch 300K output requires the documented beta header.
- Do not treat the 40% cost claim as your invoice.
Watch-outs
Who should pass, and what to validate before rollout.
- Do not stay on Opus 5 for new work just to avoid a prompt change.
- Do not cut over clients that still send computer_20251124 on the Claude API or Google Cloud.
- Do not treat the 40% cost claim as a guaranteed discount.
Final recommendation
What to do after reading the table.
Move new Opus routes to Opus 5.5 after a replay. Keep Opus 5 only where the breaking changes still block you.
FAQ
Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Claude Opus 5?
Neither Claude Opus 5.5 nor Claude Opus 5 is a universal winner. Use the comparison table and the choose-when notes, then validate on your workload.
Which is better for coding: Claude Opus 5.5 or Claude Opus 5?
Claude Opus 5.5: Anthropic reports large gains versus Opus 5 on long coding jobs and says a 680,000-line migration finished in under a day in one early test. Claude Opus 5: Prior Opus agent default. Anthropic's new table shows lower coding and computer-use scores than Opus 5.5. The catalog does not declare a winner on coding and agents.
Which is cheaper: Claude Opus 5.5 or Claude Opus 5?
Listed unit prices: Claude Opus 5.5 $4 / $20. Cache read $0.20 (60% below Opus 5). 5-minute cache write $5; Claude Opus 5 Anthropic's comparison table lists Opus 5 at $5 input / $25 output and $0.50 cache reads per 1M. A lower listed unit price is not the same as a lower total workload cost—tokens, session minutes, caching, introductory rates, and add-on modes can reverse the ranking. Confirm live rates on each vendor’s official page.
Can I use both Claude Opus 5.5 and Claude Opus 5?
Yes. Many teams keep both and route by constraint. Use Claude Opus 5.5 for Current Opus-tier agents, coding migrations, and knowledge work, and Claude Opus 5 for Pinned Opus 5 clients until they absorb the Opus 5.5 breaking changes. Confirm vendor terms before mixing them in one production workflow.