Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.6 vs GPT-5.4
Head-to-head evidence from 38 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.6 #16 (Supported); GPT-5.4 #8 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.4 share 38 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 8 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.6; 14 to GPT-5.4.
Updated July 20, 2026- Shared results
- 38
- Claude Opus 4.6 only
- 8
- GPT-5.4 only
- 14
- Comparable categories
- 5 / 8
Pick GPT-5.4 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Opus 4.6 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.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 38 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 68.59. 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 mathematics, where it averages 42.5 against 36.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 65.4% to 75.1%. Claude Opus 4.6 does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Claude Opus 4.6 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 4.6 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 1M for Claude Opus 4.6.
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 4.6 | Δ | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Claude Opus 4.669.1 | Margin← 11.5 | GPT-5.457.6 |
| Coding | Claude Opus 4.668.1 | Margin← 10.4 | GPT-5.457.7 |
| Math | Claude Opus 4.636.3 | Margin→ 6.2 | GPT-5.442.5 |
| Agentic | Claude Opus 4.673.0 | Margin→ 4.2 | GPT-5.477.2 |
| Multimodal | Claude Opus 4.677.3 | Margin← 4.1 | GPT-5.473.2 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 65.4%B 75.1%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 9.7Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Opus 4.6 scored 65.4%; GPT-5.4 scored 75.1%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 40.700%B 47.600%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 6.9FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Claude Opus 4.6 scored 40.700%; GPT-5.4 scored 47.600%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 53.4%B 57.7%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 4.3SWE-bench Pro: Claude Opus 4.6 scored 53.4%; GPT-5.4 scored 57.7%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
MathA 22.900%B 27.100%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 4.2FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Claude Opus 4.6 scored 22.900%; GPT-5.4 scored 27.100%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 77.3%B 81.2%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 3.9MMMU-Pro: Claude Opus 4.6 scored 77.3%; GPT-5.4 scored 81.2%. 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 4.6 | GPT-5.4 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Opus 4.6$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 4.640 tok/s | GPT-5.474 tok/s | GPT-5.4 has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Opus 4.61.78 s | GPT-5.4151.79 s | Claude Opus 4.6 reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Opus 4.61M | GPT-5.41.05M | GPT-5.4 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGPT-5.4 wins17 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 65.4% | 75.1% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 83.7% | 82.7% | Claude Opus 4.6 leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 72.7% | 75% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 84.8% | 87.1% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| Claw-EvalSource | 70.4% | 60.3% | Claude Opus 4.6 leads |
| DeepSearchQASource | 73.7% | 73.6% | Claude Opus 4.6 leads |
| CyberGymSource | 66.6% | 79.0% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 61.85% | 64.89% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 19.9% | 15.3% | Claude Opus 4.6 leads |
| JobBenchSource | 36.7% | 38.9% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 70.6% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 54.6% | 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 |
| ExploitGymSource | — | 6.0% | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Opus 4.6 wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 80.8% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench Verified*Source | 75.6% | — | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBench ProSource | 70.7% | 87.5% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 53.4% | 57.7% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| SWE-RebenchSource | 65.3% | — | Not comparable |
| React Native EvalsSource | 84.1% | 85.3% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 57.57% | 67.42% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 45.7% | 56.6% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | 26.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 71.0% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.6 wins16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 91.3% | 92.8% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 89.2% | 92.8% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| SuperGPQASource | 95% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 82% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-Pro (Arcee)Source | 89.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 53% | 52.1% | Claude Opus 4.6 leads |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 40% | 39.8% | Claude Opus 4.6 leads |
| HealthBench HardSource | 14.8% | 40.1% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| MedXpertQA (Text)Source | 52.1% | 59.6% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 37.8% | 51.4% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 84.0% | 92.0% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 18.6% | 41.6% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 3.5% | 5.7% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 45.2% | 50.0% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 76.0% | 88.6% | Claude Opus 4.6 leads |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | — | 48.1% | Not comparable |
MathGPT-5.4 wins3 benchmarks
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.6 wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 77.3% | 81.2% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| ERQASource | 51.6% | 65.4% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | 83.1% | 85.4% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| MedXpertQA (MM)Source | 64.8% | 77.1% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 72.5% | 78.4% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1328 | 1252 | Claude Opus 4.6 leads |
| OfficeQA ProSource | — | 53.2% | Not comparable |
| MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource | — | 82.1% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 82.8% | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | — | 61.1% | Not comparable |
| ZeroBenchSource | — | 41.0% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | GPT-5.4 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 44.6% | 73.9% | GPT-5.4 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (6)
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.4?
GPT-5.4 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 74.24 to 68.59. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 65.4% and 75.1%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.4?
Claude Opus 4.6 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 69.1 versus 57.6. Inside this category, HealthBench Hard is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.4?
Claude Opus 4.6 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 68.1 versus 57.7. Inside this category, LiveCodeBench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.4?
GPT-5.4 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 42.5 versus 36.3. 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 4.6 or GPT-5.4?
GPT-5.4 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 73. Inside this category, CyberGym is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.4?
Claude Opus 4.6 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.3 versus 73.2. Inside this category, Design Arena Website 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.