Model comparison
Claude 4.1 Opus vs GPT-5.5
Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4.1 Opus #142 (Supported); GPT-5.5 #9 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude 4.1 Opus and GPT-5.5 share 3 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Claude 4.1 Opus; 54 to GPT-5.5.
Updated July 22, 2026- Shared results
- 3
- Claude 4.1 Opus only
- 1
- GPT-5.5 only
- 54
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick GPT-5.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 4.1 Opus only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-5.5 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 73.51 to 45.88. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude 4.1 Opus is also the more expensive model on tokens at $15.00 input / $75.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $5.00 input / $30.00 output per 1M tokens for GPT-5.5. That is roughly 2.5x on output cost alone. GPT-5.5 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude 4.1 Opus 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-5.5 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude 4.1 Opus.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude 4.1 Opus | Δ | GPT-5.5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Claude 4.1 Opus74.5 | Margin← 15.9 | GPT-5.558.6 |
| Agentic | Claude 4.1 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.581.6 |
| Reasoning | Claude 4.1 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.585.0 |
| Knowledge | Claude 4.1 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.557.8 |
| Math | Claude 4.1 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.547.6 |
| Multimodal | Claude 4.1 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.570.4 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude 4.1 Opus | GPT-5.5 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude 4.1 Opus$15 input / $75 output | GPT-5.5$5 input / $30 output | GPT-5.5 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude 4.1 Opus29 tok/s | GPT-5.5Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude 4.1 Opus1.66 s | GPT-5.5Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude 4.1 Opus200K | GPT-5.51M | GPT-5.5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic24 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | GPT-5.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| JobBenchSource | 21.9% | 42.7% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 82% | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | — | 81.8% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 84.4% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 78.7% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 75.3% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 55.6% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 93.9% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 44.9% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 37.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 49.5% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1490 | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 72.93% | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 17.0% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 13.0% | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | — | 13.4% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 1154 | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 42.1% | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 46.6% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 86.3% | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 45.8% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 31.3% | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | — | 60.6% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 84.3% | Not comparable |
CodingClaude 4.1 Opus wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | GPT-5.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 74.5% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 58.6% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 82.0% | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | — | 69.85% | Not comparable |
| React Native EvalsSource | — | 84.7% | Not comparable |
| cursorBench31Source | — | 59.2% | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | — | 58.4% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 74.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 56.1% | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | — | 43.0% | Not comparable |
Reasoning5 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | GPT-5.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 28.2% | 54.8% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| GPQASource | — | 93.6% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 93.6% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 52.2% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 41.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 93.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 44.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 20.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 56.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 85.5% | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multimodal5 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | GPT-5.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 75.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude 4.1 Opus or GPT-5.5?
GPT-5.5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 73.51 to 45.88.
Which is better for coding, Claude 4.1 Opus or GPT-5.5?
Claude 4.1 Opus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 74.5 versus 58.6. GPT-5.5 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.