
Real head-to-head · same prompt, one shot
Claude Opus 5 vs Kilo Code
The new Anthropic flagship — benched on all 45 one-shot builds the day it landed. vs Fable 5-class intelligence at ~59% less. The split-the-cost play.
What I tested — same prompt, two models
I run the same fixed prompt set through every new model the day it drops — same string, one shot, single HTML file out — and I score the result 0–10 on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. Below is what came out when I gave the exact same prompts to Claude Opus 5 and Kilo Code, side by side, on 0 shared tasks inside the Agent Operating System.
Both models were given identical prompts inside the Agent Operating System — no help, no iteration, no "best of N" tricks. I run each prompt once, save the HTML file the model produces, and score it 0–10 on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. The scoring is mine. The verdicts below are pulled from my source comparison guides at agentos.guide where I publish every score and the reasoning behind it.
Claude Opus 5 · Benched on all 45 GoldieBench tasks via API on release day, incremental deploys as scores landed.
Kilo Code · Used inside Agent OS as a routing layer: Fable 5 generates the plan, cheaper models execute. Bench scoring pending a head-to-head comparison.
Side-by-side on 22 shared tasks
Click any cell to play that model's actual one-shot attempt. Medals are derived from my 0–10 scores per task (highest = 🥇, second = 🥈, third = 🥉).
Task ↓
Claude Opus 5
Kilo Code
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Strengths & weaknesses I logged
Claude Opus 5
Strengths
- Frontier-class coding + agentic reasoning (Claude 5 family)
- 1M-token context — reads an entire codebase in one call
- Benched here with skill-infused game prompts the day of release
Trade-offs
- Premium pricing ($5/$25 per M) — route the everyday 90% to cheaper lanes
- Reasoning-by-default eats token budgets unless tuned per call
Kilo Code
Strengths
- Kilo's own rubric: Fable 5 plan = 9.1/10, GPT-5.5 plan = 8.3/10 — Kilo isolates where the intelligence actually lives
- Plan quality stays high while execution cost drops
- Drop-in for Agent OS — Kilo Split framework already wired
Trade-offs
- Adds routing complexity — two model providers in one workflow
- No per-task goldiebench head-to-heads yet
Pricing & context — the spec sheet
| Spec | Claude Opus 5 | Kilo Code |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | Anthropic | Kilo |
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | Varies — Kilo splits planning from execution across multiple models |
| Price | $5 / $25 per M | ~59% less than Fable 5 solo |
| Pricing detail | Anthropic's brand-new flagship — the first Opus of the Claude 5 family, with a 1M-token context window. Benched via API the day it dropped; game tasks use our skill-infused AAA build prompts. | Kilo Code is a routing layer that splits planning (heavy model) from execution (cheaper model) so you get Fable-5-class plans driving GPT-5.5-class builds. Total spend lands at ~59% less than running Fable 5 end-to-end. |
| Release | 2026-07 | 2026-06-16 |
| Bench coverage | 13/22 scored · avg 5.60/10 | 0/0 scored · avg — |
The verdict — which should you pick?
Not enough scored shared tasks yet for a head-to-head average. The live demos for both are on the matrix above — play them and form your own opinion.
If you only run one of these inside your stack, the head-to-head average above is the call. If you can run both, my honest play is to wire Claude Opus 5 and Kilo Code both into the Agent Operating System and dispatch each from the kanban by task type — hardest agentic builds → Claude Opus 5, cost-conscious operators who run high-volume agent loops → Kilo Code. That's the same setup I run for the 4,000+ founders inside the AI Profit Boardroom.
FAQ — Claude Opus 5 vs Kilo Code
Which is better, Claude Opus 5 or Kilo Code?
On Goldie Bench, Claude Opus 5 averages no scored verdicts yet across the shared tasks, with 0 gold, 0 silver, 1 bronze overall. Kilo Code averages no scored verdicts yet, with 0 gold, 0 silver, 0 bronze. Not enough scored shared tasks yet to call a winner.
How much does Claude Opus 5 cost vs Kilo Code?
Claude Opus 5: Anthropic's brand-new flagship — the first Opus of the Claude 5 family, with a 1M-token context window. Benched via API the day it dropped; game tasks use our skill-infused AAA build prompts. Kilo Code: Kilo Code is a routing layer that splits planning (heavy model) from execution (cheaper model) so you get Fable-5-class plans driving GPT-5.5-class builds. Total spend lands at ~59% less than running Fable 5 end-to-end.
What's the context window for Claude Opus 5 vs Kilo Code?
Claude Opus 5 has a 1,000,000 tokens context window. Kilo Code has a Varies — Kilo splits planning from execution across multiple models context window.
When should I pick Claude Opus 5 over Kilo Code?
Pick Claude Opus 5 for: Hardest agentic builds; Whole-repo reasoning; Frontier one-shots. The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: Premium pricing ($5/$25 per M) — route the everyday 90% to cheaper lanes; Reasoning-by-default eats token budgets unless tuned per call.
When should I pick Kilo Code over Claude Opus 5?
Pick Kilo Code for: Cost-conscious operators who run high-volume agent loops; Multi-step workflows where the plan is the expensive part; Teams already paying for Fable 5 who want to keep the plan but drop the execution bill. The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: Adds routing complexity — two model providers in one workflow; No per-task goldiebench head-to-heads yet.
How does Goldie Bench score Claude Opus 5 vs Kilo Code?
Every demo on this page was built by Julian Goldie inside the Agent Operating System — same fixed prompt for both models, one shot, single HTML file out. Each result gets a 0–10 score on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. The highest score on each task gets gold; second gets silver; third gets bronze. See methodology for full provenance.
Related comparisons
Other head-to-heads using the same scoring system:
Claude Opus 5 vs Fusion Kilo Code vs Fusion Claude Opus 5 vs Hermes MoA Kilo Code vs Hermes MoA Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol Kilo Code vs GPT-5.6 Sol Claude Opus 5 vs Claude Fable 5 Kilo Code vs Claude Fable 5Full model pages: Claude Opus 5 · Kilo Code · back to the leaderboard
The same stack Julian uses
Run this stack yourself.
Every demo on this bench was built inside the Agent Operating System — one prompt, one shot, single HTML file out. The Agent OS, the prompts, the templates, the weekly walkthroughs and 4,000+ founders shipping with it every day all live inside the AI Profit Boardroom.
4,000+founders
258documented wins
38countries
$59/momonthly











