Claude Opus 4.8 vs Composer 2
Anthropic Claude Opus 4.8 | Cursor Composer 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Company | Anthropic | Cursor |
| Release date | May 28 2026 | Mar 20 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Specifications | ||
Context window | 1M | — |
| Benchmarks | ||
Nonsense detection BullshitBench v2Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 95% | — |
Agentic coding SWE-Bench ProCan the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | 69.2% | — |
Multilingual coding SWE-Bench MultilingualLike SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | 84.4%Best | 73.7% |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.1Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor. Higher is better. | 63.8%Best | 52.2% |
Agentic coding DeepSWE 1.0Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. Higher is better. | 55.8% | — |
Next.js coding Next.js EvalsVercel's open eval of how well AI coding agents build and migrate real Next.js apps — measured as the share of tasks the agent completes successfully. Higher is better. | 88%Best | 75% |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.1Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | 74.6% | — |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.0Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 61.7% |
Web browsing BrowseCompCan the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | 84.3% | — |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects, written so you can't just look up the answer. “No tools” means the AI answers on its own. Higher is better. | 49.8% | — |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | 57.9% | — |
Agentic computer use OSWorld-VerifiedCan the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | 83.4% | — |
Agentic financial analysis Finance Agent v2Tests the AI on real financial-analysis work, like digging through reports and making sound decisions. Higher is better. | 53.9% | — |
Agentic legal work Harvey's Legal Agent BenchmarkHarvey's test of whether an AI agent can complete real legal work — drafting and reviewing documents, working with spreadsheets and presentations, and navigating files the way a lawyer's assistant would. Higher is better. | 9.58% | — |
Tax questions TaxEval v2A set of real tax questions created by Vals AI — can the AI give accurate answers about tax rules and filings? Higher is better. | 75.63% | — |
Medical admin work MedScribeCan the AI support doctors with their administrative work, like notes and paperwork? Created by Vals AI. Higher is better. | 85.75% | — |
Knowledge work GDPval-AAMeasures how well the AI does economically valuable knowledge work, judged against human experts. Shown as a rating (like a chess Elo) — higher is better. | 1890 | — |
Community preference Arena Elo (Text)Real people chat with two anonymous AIs side by side and vote for the answer they prefer. Votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai — it measures which AI people actually like, not test scores. Higher is better. | 1482 | — |
Community preference (code) Arena Elo (Code)Like the text arena, but people vote on which AI writes better code. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai. Higher is better. | 1560 | — |
| Timeline | ||
| Release gap | Composer 2 shipped 69 days before Claude Opus 4.8 | |
Which is better: Claude Opus 4.8 or Composer 2?
Claude Opus 4.8 leads Composer 2 on 3 of the 3 benchmarks they both report (SWE-Bench Multilingual, CursorBench v3.1, Next.js Evals). Composer 2 shipped 69 days before Claude Opus 4.8, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On SWE-Bench Multilingual, Claude Opus 4.8 leads at 84.4% vs Composer 2 at 73.7%. On CursorBench v3.1, Claude Opus 4.8 leads at 63.8% vs Composer 2 at 52.2%. On Next.js Evals, Claude Opus 4.8 leads at 88% vs Composer 2 at 75%.
Frequently asked questions
Claude Opus 4.8 was released by Anthropic on May 28 2026.
Composer 2 was released by Cursor on Mar 20 2026.
Claude Opus 4.8 leads on SWE-Bench Multilingual — Claude Opus 4.8 84.4% vs Composer 2 73.7%.
Other comparisons
Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-5.6 SolComposer 2 vs GPT-5.6 SolClaude Opus 4.8 vs Gemini OmniComposer 2 vs Gemini OmniClaude Opus 4.8 vs Muse Spark 1.1Composer 2 vs Muse Spark 1.1Claude Opus 4.8 vs Grok 4.5Composer 2 vs Grok 4.5Claude Opus 4.8 vs DeepSeek-V4-ProComposer 2 vs DeepSeek-V4-ProClaude Opus 4.8 vs Mistral Medium 3.5Composer 2 vs Mistral Medium 3.5