Claude Opus 4.6 vs Jamba Reasoning 3B
Wins 5 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Long documents
Wins 0 of 6 areas
—
Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger all-rounder.
Scores updated · 16 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 thinking30Claude Opus 4.63 of 3 tests
- CodingWriting and fixing software20Claude Opus 4.62 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up20Claude Opus 4.62 of 2 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own10Claude Opus 4.61 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Claude Opus 4.61 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked00Even0 each · 1 tie
Agents, 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+71.7points ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+56.3points ahead
- Code for real scientific research problemsSciCode+46points ahead
Where Jamba Reasoning 3B pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 16 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Opus 4.6
- SciCodeClaude Opus 4.6 by 4651.95.9+46
- Terminal-Bench HardClaude Opus 4.6 by 45.446.20.8+45.4
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.6
- GPQA DiamondClaude Opus 4.6 by 56.389.633.3+56.3
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Opus 4.6 by 36.139.93.8+36.1
- CritPtClaude Opus 4.6 by 12.612.60+12.6
FactsClaude Opus 4.6
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Opus 4.6 by 40.3476.7+40.3
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Opus 4.6 by 6.237.231+6.2
Other results6 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.
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Claude Opus 4.6 by 76.392.115.8+76.3
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Opus 4.6 by 71.413.7-57.7+71.4
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Opus 4.6 by 62.367.65.3+62.3
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Opus 4.6 by 45.648.12.5+45.6
- MMLU-ProClaude Opus 4.6 by 28.189.161+28.1
- AA IntelligenceClaude Opus 4.6 by 26.231.95.7+26.2
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.6 or Jamba Reasoning 3B?
Claude Opus 4.6 wins five of the six areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, facts and long documents. Jamba Reasoning 3B wins none. They are level on following instructions.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.6. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Jamba Reasoning 3B wins none.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 16 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 6 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.