τ²-bench Telecom
Customer-service style tasks where the model uses tools and follows policies over a conversation with a simulated user.
- ModelScoreYour cost / mo
- 1Claude Opus 4.6 · Anthropicbest value99.3%
- 2Claude Opus 4.5 · Anthropicbest value98.2%
- 3Claude Sonnet 4.6 · Anthropicbest value97.9%
“Best value”: no other model here reports a higher score at a lower cost for your workload. Scores are self-reported by each maker with different settings, so treat close calls as ties.
How each maker reported it
- Claude Opus 4.6 Table 2.3.A, p.18
Opus 4.6 results average 5 trials (SWE-bench: 25) with adaptive thinking at max effort and default sampling. MCP-Atlas is the max-effort score (62.7% at high). Gemini 3 Pro ARC-AGI-2 is Deep Thinking.
- Claude Opus 4.5 Table 2.3.A, p.19
Average of 5 trials with a 64k thinking budget, 200k context, default (high) effort and default sampling. SWE-bench, τ²-bench and MCP Atlas are without extended thinking; Terminal-bench uses a 128k budget (57.8% at 64k). GPT-5.1 MMMU is from the MMMU leaderboard.
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 Table 2.1.A, p.15
Claude Sonnet 4.6 results are averaged over 10 trials (SWE-bench over 25) with adaptive thinking at max effort and default sampling; Terminal-Bench 2.0 at default thinking. ARC-AGI-2 is 60.4% at high effort. Competitor columns as reported in the card.
Only each model's own maker's number is shown; scores a maker reports for rival models are left out.