ChatGPT vs Claude
As of October 2026, Claude is ahead of ChatGPT on public benchmark score: Claude Opus 5.5 scores 86.43 at #1, against GPT-6 Astra at 84.88 and #2. The lead is not settled: Claude Opus 5.5's 90% interval (80.4–92.4) overlaps GPT-6 Astra's (79.8–89.9). Claude's top-ranked model is the cheaper one: Claude Opus 5.5 at $4/$20 per million input/output tokens, against GPT-6 Astra at $10/$50.
This page compares ChatGPT and Claude as products, not just as models. Concretely, that means the flagship models behind each product. On the OpenAI side that is GPT-6 Astra, launched September 3, 2026 and rolling out to ChatGPT Plus, Pro, Business and Enterprise and the API, plus the GPT-5.6 family (Sol, Terra and Luna). On the Anthropic side it is Claude Opus 5.5, on the Claude API since September 22, 2026, plus Claude Fable 5.1, Claude Opus 5 (the default on Claude Max) and Claude Sonnet 5.5. Every number below comes from BenchLM's sourced benchmark and pricing data for those specific models.
Whether you search for "ChatGPT vs Claude" or "Claude vs ChatGPT", the question is the same: which assistant should get your $20 a month, and which API should run your workload? Here is what the data says in October 2026.
The short answer
Claude has the higher public score of the two products, by 1.55 points. Claude Opus 5.5 posts 86.43 at #1, while GPT-6 Astra posts 84.88 at #2. Their 90% intervals overlap, so read that as a narrow lead rather than a settled order. On coding, Claude Opus 5.5 posts 89.9 on SWE-bench Pro, the best result in this comparison; GPT-6 Astra has no sourced SWE-bench Pro row.
ChatGPT's top-ranked model is GPT-6 Astra, which carries a Supported evidence label. GPT-5.6 Sol holds ChatGPT's best agentic rows: 92.2 on BrowseComp and 91.9 on Terminal-Bench 2.1, the top results on this page for both tests, though GPT-6 Astra has no Terminal-Bench 2.1 row, and Claude Opus 5.5 has neither row. On the newer Terminal-Bench 4.0, Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads at 70.6 against GPT-6 Astra's 57.9. The table below keeps the public score separate from those raw benchmark rows.
Today Claude's top-ranked model also costs less than ChatGPT's, but the score lead sits inside the uncertainty, so the evidence behind each row and the workloads below decide. On subscriptions, ChatGPT Plus at $20/month remains the default, and ChatGPT has the broader consumer feature set.
ChatGPT vs Claude: the models behind the apps
A product comparison only makes sense at the model level, so here are the current flagships side by side. Public scores and ranks come from the same lane as the main leaderboard; the preference column is a human-preference rating from an independent index, shown where one is published.
| Model | Score | Preference rating | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | 84.88 | 1477.1 | 1.05M |
| GPT-5.6 SolOpenAI | 77.81 | 1483.9 | 1.05M |
| GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI | 72.34 | 1465.5 | 1.05M |
| GPT-5.6 LunaOpenAI | 66.15 | 1453.0 | 1.05M |
| Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic | 86.43 | 1503.7 | 1M |
| Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | 82.09 | 1501.1 | 1M |
| Claude Opus 5Anthropic | 79.44 | 1489.5 | — |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5Anthropic | 83.92 | 1471.0 | 1M |
Want the benchmark-by-benchmark breakdown? Every pairing has a dedicated model comparison page — start with Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6 Astra for the top-ranked matchup, or Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol for the two models at the same API rate.
ChatGPT vs Claude pricing: subscriptions and API
On subscriptions, ChatGPT Plus costs $20/month and unlocks the GPT-5.6 models with higher usage limits; GPT-6 Astra is rolling out to Plus as well. Anthropic's Claude Pro sits in the same consumer price band with usage caps that scale up on the more expensive Max tiers — Claude's subscription limits are generally tighter than ChatGPT's at the entry level.
The API rates are where the gap is measurable. Claude Opus 5.5 lists at $4 / $20 per million input / output tokens, the same rate as GPT-5.6 Sol, while GPT-6 Astra lists at $10 / $50. GPT-5.6 Luna is the cheapest model on this page at $0.20 / $1.20. Full provider rate cards live on the OpenAI API pricing and Anthropic API pricing hubs.
| Model | Input / 1M tokens | Output / 1M tokens | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-6 Astra | $10.00 | $50.00 | — |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | $4.00 | $20.00 | Promotional rate, at least through Nov 21, 2026 |
| GPT-5.6 Terra | $2.00 | $12.00 | — |
| GPT-5.6 Luna | $0.20 | $1.20 | — |
| Claude Opus 5.5 | $4.00 | $20.00 | — |
| Claude Fable 5.1 | $10.00 | $50.00 | — |
| Claude Opus 5 | $5.00 | $25.00 | — |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | $2.00 | $10.00 | — |
Which should you pick?
Pick ChatGPT if…
- Web research is the job: GPT-5.6 Sol posts 92.2 on BrowseComp, the top result on this page, though Claude Opus 5.5 has no BrowseComp row.
- You want one $20/month app that covers the widest consumer surface — voice, images, search, and custom GPTs alongside the core models.
- You need a cheap high-volume tier: GPT-5.6 Luna lists at $0.20 / $1.20, while the cheapest Claude model here, Claude Sonnet 5.5, is $2 / $10.
Pick Claude if…
- You want the higher public score: Claude Opus 5.5 posts 86.43, versus 84.88 for GPT-6 Astra.
- Coding is the job: Claude Opus 5.5's 89.9 on SWE-bench Pro leads this comparison, where the best ChatGPT row is GPT-5.6 Sol at 64.6.
- Long agentic terminal runs matter: Claude Sonnet 5.5 posts 70.6 on Terminal-Bench 4.0, the newest version, against 57.9 for GPT-6 Astra.
- Writing quality and conversational judgment matter: Claude Opus 5.5's 1503.7 human-preference rating is the highest published for any model here.
- You prefer Anthropic's document workflow; context size alone no longer separates the families because GPT-5.6 exposes a 1.05M-token window.
- You want a strong mid-tier deal: Claude Sonnet 5.5 is $2 / $10.
How this comparison works
BenchLM compares products through the models that power them, because "ChatGPT" and "Claude" are moving targets — each app swaps in new flagships several times a year. Overall scores use the current public ranking lane; preference ratings come from an independent human-preference index and appear only where one has been published; API prices come from each provider's official rate card as recorded in BenchLM's pricing data. Models outside the public ranking show as unranked instead of receiving a legacy fallback. Individual benchmark scores quoted in the text (SWE-bench Pro, Terminal-Bench 2.1 and 4.0, BrowseComp) come from the same sourced dataset that powers every model comparison page.
Questions
Is Claude better than ChatGPT?
On the current public ranking, narrowly: Claude Opus 5.5 scores 86.43 at #1, while GPT-6 Astra scores 84.88 at #2. Both rows carry a Supported evidence label. Their 90% intervals overlap, so a 1.55-point gap is too small to call.
Is Claude cheaper than ChatGPT?
At the top of the ranking, yes: Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4 input / $20 output per million tokens against $10 / $50 for GPT-6 Astra. At the budget end ChatGPT is cheaper: GPT-5.6 Luna lists at $0.20 / $1.20, against $2 / $10 for Claude Sonnet 5.5, the cheapest Claude model here.
Which is better for coding, ChatGPT or Claude?
Claude, on the public coding ranking: Claude Sonnet 5.5 ranks #1 at 84.02, against GPT-6 Astra at #4 with 76.11. Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads by point estimate; its evidence label is Supported. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence. Claude Opus 5.5's 89.9 on SWE-bench Pro is also the top result in this comparison; GPT-6 Astra has none.
Can I use both ChatGPT and Claude?
Yes, and we would split by job rather than pick one: Claude for coding and long-form writing, ChatGPT for browsing-style research and high-volume work on the cheaper GPT-5.6 tiers, down to GPT-5.6 Luna at $0.20 / $1.20. On the API each provider bills per token, so running both adds no fixed cost.