Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.5 vs GPT-5.4
Head-to-head evidence from 29 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 #34 (Supported); 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 and GPT-5.4 share 29 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 30 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.5; 23 to GPT-5.4.
Updated July 20, 2026- Shared results
- 29
- Claude Opus 4.5 only
- 30
- GPT-5.4 only
- 23
- Comparable categories
- 5 / 8
Pick GPT-5.4 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Opus 4.5 only becomes the better choice if mathematics 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 29 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 5 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-5.4 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 74.24 to 64.22. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.4's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 77.2 against 62.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 20.690% to 47.600%. Claude Opus 4.5 does hit back in mathematics, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Claude Opus 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $2.50 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens for GPT-5.4. GPT-5.4 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Opus 4.5 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 gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 200K for Claude Opus 4.5.
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 Opus 4.5 | Δ | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Claude Opus 4.557.5 | Margin← 15.0 | GPT-5.442.5 |
| Agentic | Claude Opus 4.562.6 | Margin→ 14.6 | GPT-5.477.2 |
| Coding | Claude Opus 4.571.7 | Margin← 14.0 | GPT-5.457.7 |
| Multimodal | Claude Opus 4.569.9 | Margin→ 3.3 | GPT-5.473.2 |
| Knowledge | Claude Opus 4.558.1 | Margin← 0.5 | GPT-5.457.6 |
| Reasoning | Claude Opus 4.564.4 | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.4Not measured |
| Multilingual | Claude Opus 4.585.7 | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.4Not measured |
| Inst. Following | Claude Opus 4.569.5 | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.4Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 20.690%B 47.600%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 26.9FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Claude Opus 4.5 scored 20.690%; GPT-5.4 scored 47.600%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
MathA 4.167%B 27.100%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 22.9FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Claude Opus 4.5 scored 4.167%; GPT-5.4 scored 27.100%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 30.8%B 52.1%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 21.3HLE: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 30.8%; GPT-5.4 scored 52.1%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 59.3%B 75.1%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 15.8Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 59.3%; GPT-5.4 scored 75.1%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
CharXiv
MultimodalA 68.5%B 82.8%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 14.3CharXiv: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 68.5%; GPT-5.4 scored 82.8%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.5 | GPT-5.4 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Opus 4.5$5 input / $25 output | GPT-5.4$2.5 input / $15 output | GPT-5.4 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Opus 4.546 tok/s | GPT-5.474 tok/s | GPT-5.4 has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Opus 4.51.01 s | GPT-5.4151.79 s | Claude Opus 4.5 reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Opus 4.5200K | GPT-5.41.05M | GPT-5.4 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGPT-5.4 wins24 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 59.3% | 75.1% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 66.3% | 75% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| OSWorldSource | 66.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | 59.6% | 60.3% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| QwenClawBenchSource | 52.3% | — | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | 70.2% | — | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | 23.3% | — | Not comparable |
| DeepPlanningSource | 26.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 43.5% | 54.6% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| MCP AtlasSource | 42.3% | 70.6% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| MCP-TasksSource | 71.8% | — | Not comparable |
| WideResearchSource | 76.4% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 50.6% | 79.0% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 86.3% | 87.1% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 64.23% | 64.89% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| JobBenchSource | 32.3% | 38.9% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 82.7% | 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 | — | 1395 | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 15.3% | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | — | 6.0% | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Opus 4.5 wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 80.9% | — | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBench v6Source | 84.8% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 57.1% | 57.7% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 77.5% | — | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | 43.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 47.0% | 56.6% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| LiveCodeBench ProSource | — | 87.5% | Not comparable |
| React Native EvalsSource | — | 85.3% | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | — | 67.42% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 71.0% | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.5 wins18 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 87% | 92.8% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| SuperGPQASource | 70.6% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 89.5% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | 96.6% | — | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | 92.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 30.8% | 52.1% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 34.7% | 51.4% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 81.0% | 92.0% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 12.9% | 41.6% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -3.9% | 5.7% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 40.7% | 50.0% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 75.4% | 88.6% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| AA MMLU-ProSource | 88.9% | — | 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 |
MathClaude Opus 4.5 wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME26Source | 95.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2025Source | 92.9% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Nov 2025Source | 93.3% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | 85.3% | — | Not comparable |
| MMAnswerBenchSource | 84.0% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | 20.690% | 47.600% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | 4.167% | 27.100% | GPT-5.4 leads |
Multilingual2 benchmarks
MultimodalGPT-5.4 wins14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 70.6% | 81.2% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| MathVisionSource | 74.3% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 68.5% | 82.8% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| VideoMMMUSource | 84.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | 45.7% | 85.4% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| V*Source | 67.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 71.2% | 78.4% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1279 | 1252 | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| OfficeQA ProSource | — | 53.2% | Not comparable |
| MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource | — | 82.1% | Not comparable |
| ERQASource | — | 65.4% | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | — | 61.1% | Not comparable |
| ZeroBenchSource | — | 41.0% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (MM)Source | — | 77.1% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (6)
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.5 or GPT-5.4?
GPT-5.4 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 74.24 to 64.22. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 20.690% and 47.600%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or GPT-5.4?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 58.1 versus 57.6. Inside this category, AA-HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.5 or GPT-5.4?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 71.7 versus 57.7. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Claude Opus 4.5 or GPT-5.4?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 57.5 versus 42.5. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or GPT-5.4?
GPT-5.4 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 62.6. Inside this category, CyberGym is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or GPT-5.4?
GPT-5.4 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 73.2 versus 69.9. Inside this category, ScreenSpot Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
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.