Head-to-head comparison across 3benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Claude Opus 4.5
80
GPT-5.4 nano
63
Verified leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 #5 · GPT-5.4 nano unranked
Pick Claude Opus 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.4 nano only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 400K context window or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Agentic
+19.6 difference
Knowledge
+13.0 difference
Multimodal
+4.5 difference
Claude Opus 4.5
GPT-5.4 nano
$null / $null
$0.2 / $1.25
46 t/s
191 t/s
1.01s
3.64s
200K
400K
Pick Claude Opus 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.4 nano only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 400K context window or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Claude Opus 4.5 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 80 to 63. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Opus 4.5's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 62.5 against 42.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is OSWorld-Verified, 66.3% to 39%.
GPT-5.4 nano 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 nano gives you the larger context window at 400K, compared with 200K for Claude Opus 4.5.
Claude Opus 4.5 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 80 to 63. The biggest single separator in this matchup is OSWorld-Verified, where the scores are 66.3% and 39%.
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 66.2 versus 53.2. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 62.5 versus 42.9. Inside this category, OSWorld-Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 70.6 versus 66.1. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro 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.