The Right-Sized LLM Benchmark Cheapest LLM that's good enough.

Claude Opus 4.8 at a glance

Good enough on 12/52 tasks at the 90% bar. Best value on 0 tasks. Best fit for: Financial Analysis & Trading Decisions, Structured Data & Fact Extraction, Social & Promotional Content, Relevance, Clas

Provider
Anthropic
Model name
claude-opus-4-8
Cost mode:
Qualifies on
12 / 52 tasks (at 90% bar)
Best value on
0 tasks

Cost vs quality across all tasks

0%25%50%75%100%78910Quality score (7–10)Cost-efficiency vs best value (1.0 = best value)Engagement Reply Review — quality 9.77, 58.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionActivity Feed Blurb Generation — quality 8.76, 34.7x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionInvestment Panel Voting — quality 8.88, 7.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionSocial Post Promotion — quality 8.56, 22.7x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionS-1 TOC Extraction — quality 8.57, 26.7x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionLanguage Detection — quality 9.98, 86.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPublication Title Generation — quality 8.93, 34.5x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionEngagement Triage — quality 8.70, 63.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionClaim Extraction — quality 7.48, 26.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionSEC S-1 Chunk Analysis — quality 9.21, 17.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionClaim Refinement — quality 7.99, 34.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionEngagement Reply Draft — quality 7.70, 9.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough option

within ~1.3× of the best-value model · 1.3–2× · >2× · ★ this model is the best-value pick on that task. Top-right = best quadrant. Only tasks where this model qualifies at the 90% bar are plotted.

Per-task breakdown

TaskCategoryQuality (% of best)ConfidenceOverpay
Investment Panel VotingFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions98%HIGH7.2x
Engagement Reply DraftSocial & Promotional Content91%MEDIUM9.1x
SEC S-1 Chunk Analysis bestFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions100%HIGH17x
Social Post PromotionSocial & Promotional Content96%HIGH23x
Claim ExtractionStructured Data & Fact Extraction95%MEDIUM26x
S-1 TOC ExtractionStructured Data & Fact Extraction91%MEDIUM27x
Publication Title GenerationContent Summarization & Synthesis100%RANKED34x
Activity Feed Blurb GenerationSocial & Promotional Content100%RANKED35x
Claim RefinementInfrastructure & Utility94%MEDIUM35x
Engagement Reply ReviewRelevance, Classification & Matching99%RANKED58x
Engagement TriageRelevance, Classification & Matching98%RANKED64x
Language DetectionRelevance, Classification & Matching99%RANKED86x

Overpay — how much more you pay by running this model instead of the best-value model that clears the quality bar on that task (marked ★). "16x" means you overpay 16× — the same output for 16× the best-value good-enough option; ★ means this model is that option (no overpayment). Confidence — how sure we are about the quality score (more judgments + more agreement = higher confidence): RANKED many independent judges scored this model's outputs and their agreement is very high (most confident) — HIGH many judges have scored it and they mostly agree (well-pinned) — MEDIUM enough judges have weighed in to publish, but they disagree more than we'd like (treat with a small grain of salt). LOW-confidence cells are hidden everywhere on the site. See the methodology for the exact thresholds.