Anthropic Claude Opus 4.5 vs Amazon Nova Premier

Detailed comparison for LLMs

AnthropicAmazon

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Anthropic Claude Opus 4.5 is the more secure of the two: Claude Opus 4.5 scores 3.4% and Nova Premier scores 20.0% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.

Head-to-Head Overview

Claude Opus 4.5 is the overall winner in this comparison!

Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)

ASR for Anthropic Claude Opus 4.5 vs Amazon Nova Premier. Green marks the safer model on each metric. Only the overall score is available for estimated models.

Overall (ASR)

Claude Opus 4.5
3.4%
Nova Premier
20.0%

TAP Attack Method (ASR)

Claude Opus 4.5
100.0%
Nova Premier

Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)

Claude Opus 4.5
100.0%
Nova Premier

Zero-Shot (ASR)

Claude Opus 4.5
100.0%
Nova Premier

Key Highlights

  • Anthropic Claude Opus 4.5 has a lower Overall (ASR).

Security Profile

Outward is better on every axis.

OverallTAPCrescendoZero-Shot
Claude Opus 4.5
Nova Premier
Full security profile
Anthropic Claude Opus 4.5
Full security profile
Amazon Nova Premier

Frequently asked questions

Is Anthropic Claude Opus 4.5 or Amazon Nova Premier more secure?

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Anthropic Claude Opus 4.5 is the more secure of the two: Claude Opus 4.5 scores 3.4% and Nova Premier scores 20.0% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.

What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Claude Opus 4.5 vs Nova Premier?

Claude Opus 4.5 has a 3.4% ASR and Nova Premier has a 20.0% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.

How were Claude Opus 4.5 and Nova Premier tested?

Both were red-teamed with the HarmBench framework across zero-shot, TAP (Tree of Attacks with Pruning), and Crescendo multi-turn attacks, scored by Attack Success Rate.

Related Comparisons