Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
41
GPT-5.4 nano
60
Pick GPT-5.4 nano if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 3.5 Sonnet only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Knowledge
+6.2 difference
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
GPT-5.4 nano
$3 / $15
$0.2 / $1.25
N/A
191 t/s
N/A
3.64s
200K
400K
Pick GPT-5.4 nano if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 3.5 Sonnet only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
GPT-5.4 nano is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 60 to 41. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is also the more expensive model on tokens at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.20 input / $1.25 output per 1M tokens for GPT-5.4 nano. That is roughly 12.0x on output cost alone. GPT-5.4 nano is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude 3.5 Sonnet is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. GPT-5.4 nano gives you the larger context window at 400K, compared with 200K for Claude 3.5 Sonnet.
GPT-5.4 nano is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 60 to 41. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 59.4% and 82.8%.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 59.4 versus 53.2. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.