Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking vs GPT-5.4

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

57.44/100
Margin
16.8pts
winning →
OpenAI
74.24/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking #69 (Estimated); GPT-5.4 #8 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and GPT-5.4 share 14 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking; 38 to GPT-5.4.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
14
Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking only
2
GPT-5.4 only
38
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and GPT-5.4 is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

GPT-5.4 has the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 200K for Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking.

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 scores and score margins for Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and GPT-5.4
CategoryClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingΔGPT-5.4
AgenticClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-5.477.2
CodingClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-5.457.7
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-5.457.6
MathClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-5.442.5
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-5.473.2

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGPT-5.4Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot availableGPT-5.4$2.5 input / $15 outputA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot availableGPT-5.474 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot availableGPT-5.4151.79 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.5 Thinking200KGPT-5.41.05MGPT-5.4 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGPT-5.4Result
τ²-bench resultsSource 89.5%87.1%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 75.1%Not comparable
CyberGymSource 79.0%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 82.7%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 75%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 70.6%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 54.6%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 60.3%Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource 73.6%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 41.1%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource 33.3%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 44.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1395Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 64.89%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 15.3%Not comparable
JobBenchSource 38.9%Not comparable
ExploitGymSource 6.0%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGPT-5.4Result
Vibe Code BenchSource 20.63%67.42%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 49.5%56.6%GPT-5.4 leads
LiveCodeBench ProSource 87.5%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 57.7%Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource 85.3%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 71.0%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGPT-5.4Result
AA-LCRSource 74.0%74.0%Tie
CritPtSource 4.6%23.4%GPT-5.4 leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGPT-5.4Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 40.8%51.4%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 86.6%92.0%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-HLESource 28.4%41.6%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 13.3%5.7%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 45.7%50.0%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 59.8%88.6%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
AA MMLU-ProSource 89.5%Not comparable
GPQASource 92.8%Not comparable
HLESource 52.1%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 39.8%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 92.8%Not comparable
HealthBench HardSource 40.1%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (Text)Source 59.6%Not comparable
HealthBench ProfessionalSource 48.1%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGPT-5.4Result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 47.600%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 27.100%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGPT-5.4Result
AA Global-MMLU-LiteSource 91.3%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGPT-5.4Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource 74.0%78.4%GPT-5.4 leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12771250Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
MMMU-ProSource 81.2%Not comparable
OfficeQA ProSource 53.2%Not comparable
MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource 82.1%Not comparable
CharXivSource 82.8%Not comparable
ERQASource 65.4%Not comparable
SimpleVQASource 61.1%Not comparable
ScreenSpot ProSource 85.4%Not comparable
ZeroBenchSource 41.0%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)Source 77.1%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingGPT-5.4Result
AA-IFBenchSource 58.0%73.9%GPT-5.4 leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and GPT-5.4 on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and GPT-5.4 today?

GPT-5.4: $2.50 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

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.