What's the best AI model for OpenClaw?

by

There's a question we all ask when setting up : which model should I actually use?

What are your suggestions? Any preferences?

The "best" model definitely depends on your workflows and priorities. High success rate, fast completions, or cost efficient? For coding tasks, there's this thread suggesting , , and 's GPT models, while open-weight models like are bridging the gap with every release.

Curious what the community recommends for ?

Note: The poll is inspired by the current leaderboard on by

[1]:

[2]:

840 views

Add a comment

Replies

Best

It really depends on what you are doing mainly, I guess. Each model has some good and not so good characteristics. And sometimes it matters which one you are used to. I imagine, if I use openclaw to write some code, Opus is my choice. And If I want to do something more creative, or do a web search, then I read that Gemini does better results

yes, it definitely depends on your workflows and priorities. curious to have your opinions.

Great question — model choice really depends on the use case. For creative writing and long-form narrative (my domain with zz-novel), I've found that the models with stronger instruction-following and consistent tone over long contexts outperform pure 'intelligence' benchmarks. Gemini Flash has been surprisingly good for story generation at scale. Curious what workflows people are optimizing for here

 thanks for the suggestion! any experiences with open-weight models from or for example?

 Haven't tested MiniMax or Mistral specifically for long-form fiction generation, but my experience is that open-weight models still struggle with maintaining story coherence across chapters compared to top closed models.

For zz-novel (AI novel writing tool I'm building), we ended up going with Gemini 2.5 Pro — the extended context window and instruction-following quality made a real difference for multi-chapter narrative consistency. Curious if anyone's had better results with open-weight for creative writing use cases though!

Voted Claude. Been using Sonnet and Opus daily for the past few months while building solo and for coding tasks specifically nothing else comes close in terms of understanding context and getting the architecture right on the first pass.

That said, GPT leading the poll doesn't surprise me. It's still the default for most people and it's genuinely good at a wide range of tasks. The gap between the top models is shrinking fast though , six months ago this poll would've been way more lopsided.

Honestly the "best model" question is becoming less about which one is objectively better and more about which one fits how you think. Some people click with how Claude reasons through problems, others prefer GPT's style. At this point the tooling around the model matters almost as much as the model itself.

With the top-of-the-line models, it's definitely a matter of personal preference. My personal favorite is clearly Opus 4.6. My experience with local models—running on an M1 Mac Studio Ultra (e.g., Qwen-3-next 80b)—is that it's only worthwhile if you absolutely have to work on-site. Of course, if you have the performance of two of the latest, fully equipped Mac Studios, the situation is different. But then you're also looking at an additional €20,000. Smaller local models simply don't deliver the same results when it comes to decision-making (main agent).

GPT leading doesn't surprise me at all. A lot of people vote for what they trust most day to day, not just benchmark performance.

yes, and on the other hand, 's GPT models might be among the most expensive, too! any experiences with open-weight models from or for example?

Would honestly love to see this split by workflow, because one "best model" overall feels too broad to be useful.

"Would honestly love to see this split by workflow"

great suggestion - fwiw you can find on a task-level performance heatmap: each cell shows the score percentage for a model on a specific task, grouped by category.

hope it helps! s/o to and the team for building it

Claude Opus 4.6 with extended thinking for everything. Full stop.

We run it across virtually every workflow, coding, security analysis, content, strategy, architecture, all of it. The only exceptions are basic boilerplate and simple admin tasks. The cost premium is worth it because the accuracy and output quality eliminates the rework cycles you'd burn through with cheaper models. You save more in iteration time than you spend on tokens.

We're consistently hitting 95%+ accuracy across tasks, but here's the part nobody talks about: that's not just the model. We've built an extensive custom context memory and state management system that feeds the model exactly what it needs across sessions. Persistent memory, governance documents, project state, lessons learned, all structured and available in every interaction.

This is the biggest gap in how most people use these models. Even Opus 4.6 in extended thinking will underperform if you're starting every conversation from zero with no context, no memory, and no structured state. The model is the engine but the context system is the fuel. Without it, every model, no matter how powerful, is reasoning in a vacuum. The teams investing in memory architecture and context management are getting dramatically better results than teams just picking the "best model" and hoping for the best.

The model matters. How you feed it matters more.

I've been running Opus 4.6 for most work - coding, research, content drafting. The context window handles big projects well and I like how it reasons through multi-step tasks.

For quick one-off stuff I'll sometimes use Sonnet 4.5 to save cost, but when something matters I go back to Opus. The quality gap shows up fast on anything that requires judgment.

This is super useful, especially seeing success rates across models in one place. One thing I’ve noticed while working with OpenClaw is that people don’t just struggle with “which model performs best” , they struggle with “what setup should I actually run without burning through budget”. Curious if you’ve thought about combining benchmark data with real-world cost estimation? Would make the decision much clearer for most users.

Honestly, I think the best model really comes down to whatever fits

the way you work. I started out on ChatGPT, moved over to Gemini for a

bit, and these days I'm mostly on Opus — for my workflow,

it's been a good fit, especially for longer coding sessions.

When I've got some downtime I'll test out new releases from the other

players, but it always takes a while to get comfortable with a new setup.

I never quite get around to trying everything, and that's the part that

bugs me a little — the space moves faster than I can keep up with.

Voted Claude, but I don't think there's a wrong answer here. Depends on

what you're optimizing for.

12
Next