Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Nova Premier 1.0 vs Claude Opus 4.1

Claude Opus 4.1 leads Nova Premier 1.0 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.8 to 9.2, and Nova Premier 1.0 costs 6.0x less per output token ($12.50 vs $75.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 2 benchmarks have a result for both.

Nova Premier 1.0Amazon
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$12.50
0
Claude Opus 4.1Anthropic
Coding
No data
Overall
50.2
Output $/M
$75.00
2
vs boards won of 2 shared

Nova Premier 1.0 or Claude Opus 4.1: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Nova Premier 1.0 for output tokens 6.0x cheaper ($12.50 vs $75.00 per million) and a larger context window (1M against 200K tokens).

Shared results
2
Nova Premier 1.0 only
12
Claude Opus 4.1 only
71
Like-for-like categories
2 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Nova Premier 1.0 not benchmarked, Claude Opus 4.1 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Web design, 42.7 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Design Arena: websites: Nova Premier 1.0 835 against Claude Opus 4.1 1177, 42.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Nova Premier 1.0 $12.50 against Claude Opus 4.1 $75.00 per million output tokens, 6.0x apart.
Context window
Nova Premier 1.0 takes 1M tokens, Claude Opus 4.1 200K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryNova Premier 1.0BarsClaude Opus 4.1Ties
Intelligence01
Web design01
All shared boards02
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index12 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Nova Premier 1.0 and Claude Opus 4.1
BenchmarkNova Premier 1.0Claude Opus 4.1Leader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1390Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured66.5%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)31.7%Not measuredOnly Nova Premier 1.0 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)6.8%Not measuredOnly Nova Premier 1.0 measured
Terminal-BenchNot measured38.0%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
WeirdMLNot measured45.9%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
CybenchNot measured42.0%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
ALE-Bench147.4Not measuredOnly Nova Premier 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1479Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1456Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1399Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
SciCodeNot measured4.6%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Nova Premier 1.0 and Claude Opus 4.1
BenchmarkNova Premier 1.0Claude Opus 4.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index9.222.8Claude Opus 4.1
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured144.1Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Nova Premier 1.0 and Claude Opus 4.1
BenchmarkNova Premier 1.0Claude Opus 4.1Leader
τ²-Bench Telecom38.3%Not measuredOnly Nova Premier 1.0 measured
METR time horizonsNot measured66.8%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
GDPvalNot measured43.6%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
DeepResearch BenchNot measured48.3%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for Nova Premier 1.0 and Claude Opus 4.1
BenchmarkNova Premier 1.0Claude Opus 4.1Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured76.3%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured77.5%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)56.9%Not measuredOnly Nova Premier 1.0 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.2%Not measuredOnly Nova Premier 1.0 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured77.3%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
SimpleBenchNot measured60.0%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured21.0%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
EBR-benchNot measured7.9%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
VPCTNot measured35.0%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1442Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1438Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1451Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark44.8%Not measuredOnly Nova Premier 1.0 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Nova Premier 1.0 and Claude Opus 4.1
BenchmarkNova Premier 1.0Claude Opus 4.1Leader
AIMENot measured78.2%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured95.4%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured94.4%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
AA Math Index17.3Not measuredOnly Nova Premier 1.0 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)17.3%Not measuredOnly Nova Premier 1.0 measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured68.9%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured12.6%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured2.4%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1431Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1434Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Nova Premier 1.0 and Claude Opus 4.1
BenchmarkNova Premier 1.0Claude Opus 4.1Leader
MMLU ProNot measured87.9%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured83.5%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured73.7%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured61.1%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured93.6%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured47.2%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)73.3%Not measuredOnly Nova Premier 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1422Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1416Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1421Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1406Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
FACTS Benchmark SuiteNot measured40.4%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Web design benchmarks for Nova Premier 1.0 and Claude Opus 4.1
BenchmarkNova Premier 1.0Claude Opus 4.1Leader
Design Arena: websites8351177Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1165Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1171Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1166Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1153Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1171Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1152Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1167Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index24 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Nova Premier 1.0 and Claude Opus 4.1
BenchmarkNova Premier 1.0Claude Opus 4.1Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured31.4%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured73.9%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
IFBench36.2%Not measuredOnly Nova Premier 1.0 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)34.3%Not measuredOnly Nova Premier 1.0 measured
DTBenchNot measured80.0%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMCANot measured37.1%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured84.7%Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena TextNot measured1419Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1435Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1412Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1433Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1405Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1427Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1413Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1377Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1381Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1433Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1448Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1422Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1413Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1444Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1455Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1418Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1398Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Nova Premier 1.0 and Claude Opus 4.1
BenchmarkNova Premier 1.0Claude Opus 4.1Leader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Nova Premier 1.0$0.0088Fits in one request
Claude Opus 4.1$0.052Fits in one request

Nova Premier 1.0 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Nova Premier 1.0$0.163Fits in one request
Claude Opus 4.1$0.975Fits in one request

Nova Premier 1.0 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Nova Premier 1.0$0.625Fits in one request
Claude Opus 4.1$3.75Exceeds the context window

Nova Premier 1.0 costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Nova Premier 1.0 and Claude Opus 4.1
SpecificationAmazon Nova Premier 1.0Anthropic Claude Opus 4.1
MakerAmazonAnthropic
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedOctober 31, 2025August 5, 2025
Context window1M200K
Input $/Mtok$2.50$15.00
Output $/Mtok$12.50$75.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Nova Premier 1.0 better than Claude Opus 4.1 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Nova Premier 1.0 for output tokens 6.0x cheaper ($12.50 vs $75.00 per million) and a larger context window (1M against 200K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Nova Premier 1.0 or Claude Opus 4.1?

Nova Premier 1.0 costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $12.50 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15.00 and $75.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Nova Premier 1.0 or Claude Opus 4.1?

Nova Premier 1.0, with 1M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks is the Nova Premier 1.0 vs Claude Opus 4.1 comparison based on?

2 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Nova Premier 1.0's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Claude Opus 4.1's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next