Apriel-v1.5-15B-Thinker vs Claude Opus 4.6
Wins 1 of 6 areas
Following instructions
Wins 5 of 6 areas
Coding · Reasoning · Facts · Images and charts · Long documents
Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger all-rounder.Apriel-v1.5-15B-Thinker is better at following instructions.
Scores updated · 13 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking03Claude Opus 4.63 of 3 tests
- CodingWriting and fixing software02Claude Opus 4.62 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up02Claude Opus 4.62 of 2 tests
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video01Claude Opus 4.61 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01Claude Opus 4.61 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10Apriel-v1.5-15B-Thinker1 of 1 test
Images and charts, long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude Opus 4.6 pulls ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+56.7points ahead
- Hard command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench Hard+35.6points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+30.5points ahead
Where Apriel-v1.5-15B-Thinker pulls ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+8.6points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 13 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Opus 4.6
- Terminal-Bench HardClaude Opus 4.6 by 35.610.646.2+35.6
- SciCodeClaude Opus 4.6 by 17.134.851.9+17.1
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.6
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Opus 4.6 by 27.812.139.9+27.8
- GPQA DiamondClaude Opus 4.6 by 18.371.389.6+18.3
- CritPtClaude Opus 4.6 by 11.51.112.6+11.5
FactsClaude Opus 4.6
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Opus 4.6 by 30.516.447+30.5
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Opus 4.6 by 22.514.737.2+22.5
Images and chartsClaude Opus 4.6
- MMMU-ProClaude Opus 4.6 by 18.357.175.4+18.3
Following instructionsApriel-v1.5-15B-Thinker
- IFBenchApriel-v1.5-15B-Thinker by 8.661.753.1+8.6
Other results3 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Opus 4.6 by 68.5-54.813.7+68.5
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Claude Opus 4.6 by 23.768.492.1+23.7
- AA IntelligenceClaude Opus 4.6 by 18.113.831.9+18.1
Questions people ask
Which is better, Apriel-v1.5-15B-Thinker or Claude Opus 4.6?
Claude Opus 4.6 wins five of the six areas where both have results: coding, reasoning, facts, images and charts and long documents. Apriel-v1.5-15B-Thinker wins following instructions.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.6. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Apriel-v1.5-15B-Thinker wins none.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 13 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 10 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 3 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.