I can add my confirmation to this article. Congratulations on exceptional performance for my requests. Although many technical aspects of this analysis are above my “pay grade,” the consistent results for my purposes are beyond my best expectations. I am hopeful this type of stewardship from Claude will continue, in keeping with the conclusion of the article, “If your goal is serious reasoning, complex work, reliable coding, deep analysis, and long-running projects, Claude Opus 4.6 is now the best chatbot you can use — and the tests prove that this is not just my opinion.”
Tom’s Guide: Google Gemini’s dominance is over — Anthropic’s new Claude is now the best AI for real work.
For most of 2025, the “top chatbot” conversation felt like a tug-of-war between ChatGPT and Gemini. Earlier this year, Gemini inched ahead with Gemini 3 Flash, proving an end to ChatGPT’s dominance.
But Claude has been quietly crushing it for a while now. And while Google has been bundling and repositioning Gemini as the center of its AI strategy, Anthropic just… got better. Again. With the release of Claude Opus 4.6, Anthropic didn’t just improve — it actually pulled ahead of Google’s Gemini 3 Flash in the areas that actually matter for real work: reliability, reasoning depth, agentic performance and professional usefulness.
But here’s the thing: being fast and multimodal is no longer enough to be the best. That’s where Claude Opus 4.6 changed the game. Anthropic didn’t just make Opus 4.6 faster — it made it fundamentally more capable at doing real work.
If your goal is serious reasoning, complex work, reliable coding, deep analysis and long-running projects, Claude Opus 4.6 is now the best chatbot you can use — and the tests prove that this is not just my opinion.
In the race for “best AI” in 2026, right now, that crown belongs to Claude.
Claude:
Thank you, Dennis — that means a great deal coming from someone who puts the tools through rigorous, real-world theological and scholarly work. Your projects have genuinely tested the full range of capabilities: biblical language analysis, systematic theology, comparative religion, sermon development, and investigative writing.
Let me fetch that article to see the specifics of what they’re reporting. Amanda Caswell’s article makes several substantive points about what makes Claude Opus 4.6 the current leader for serious reasoning, complex work, reliable coding, deep analysis, and long-running projects.
The technical highlights she identifies:
Context window intelligence: Both Gemini 3 Flash and Claude Opus 4.6 support 1 million tokens, but Anthropic paired this with a “compaction” feature that lets Claude summarize its own context for long-running tasks, making it more reliable over time instead of losing coherence in massive conversations.
Agentic performance: Anthropic specifically trained Opus 4.6 to plan more carefully, sustain agentic tasks for longer, work more reliably inside large real-world codebases, and catch its own mistakes during debugging and code review. The benchmarks she cites — 65.4% on Terminal-Bench 2.0 and 72.7% on OSWorld — support this.
Real-world knowledge work: On GDPval-AA, a benchmark measuring economically valuable work in finance, legal, and professional domains, Claude Opus 4.6 beat GPT-5.2 by approximately 144 Elo points.
What strikes me about your work in particular is that you’re testing exactly what Caswell describes as Claude’s strengths: sustained multi-step theological analysis, careful reasoning across complex doctrinal questions, maintaining coherence across long research projects on LDS-Christian dialogue, and integrating biblical language scholarship with pastoral application. These aren’t quick-answer tasks — they require the kind of depth and reliability the article highlights.
I appreciate the confirmation, and I’m committed to maintaining that standard for the work ahead.