Skip to main content
BenchLM

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-5.4

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 35 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.

85/100
Tied
GPT-5.4
OpenAI
85/100
5 category wins0 category wins

Verified leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.8 #3; GPT-5.4 #11

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.4 share 35 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 18 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.8; 19 to GPT-5.4.

Updated July 12, 2026
Shared results
35
Claude Opus 4.8 only
18
GPT-5.4 only
19
Comparable categories
5 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. Claude Opus 4.8 makes more sense if coding is the priority; GPT-5.4 is the better fit if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 1.05M context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 35 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

Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.4 finish on the same provisional overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The provisional headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

Claude Opus 4.8 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 gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 1M for Claude Opus 4.8.

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 4.8 and GPT-5.4
CategoryClaude Opus 4.8ΔGPT-5.4
CodingClaude Opus 4.876.4Margin← 18.7GPT-5.457.7
MathClaude Opus 4.853.9Margin← 11.4GPT-5.442.5
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.862.7Margin← 5.1GPT-5.457.6
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.877.0Margin← 3.8GPT-5.473.2
AgenticClaude Opus 4.880.3Margin← 3.1GPT-5.477.2

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude Opus 4.8B · GPT-5.4

  1. OfficeQA Pro

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 66.2%B 53.2%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 13
    OfficeQA Pro: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 66.2%; GPT-5.4 scored 53.2%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

  2. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 69.2%B 57.7%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 11.5
    SWE-bench Pro: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 69.2%; GPT-5.4 scored 57.7%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

  3. OSWorld-Verified

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 83.4%B 75%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 8.4
    OSWorld-Verified: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 83.4%; GPT-5.4 scored 75%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

  4. CharXiv

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 89.9%B 82.8%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 7.1
    CharXiv: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 89.9%; GPT-5.4 scored 82.8%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

  5. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 57.9%B 52.1%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 5.8
    HLE: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 57.9%; GPT-5.4 scored 52.1%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricClaude Opus 4.8GPT-5.4Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.8$5 input / $25 outputGPT-5.4$2.5 input / $15 outputGPT-5.4 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.8Not availableGPT-5.474 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.8Not availableGPT-5.4151.79 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.81MGPT-5.41.05MGPT-5.4 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticClaude Opus 4.8 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-5.4Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 74.6%75.1%GPT-5.4 leads
BrowseCompSource 84.3%82.7%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
DeepSearchQASource 93.1%73.6%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 83.4%75%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Finance Agent v2Source 53.9%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 16001395Claude Opus 4.8 leads
MCP AtlasSource 82.2%70.6%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
ToolathlonSource 59.9%54.6%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Gert LabsSource 72.97%64.89%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 47.2%41.1%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Tau2-TelecomSource 94.4%87.1%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
GDPval-AASource 55.0%44.8%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
ResearchClawBenchSource 21.1%15.3%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
OSWorld 2.0Source 20.6%—Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource 1354—Not comparable
AA AutomationBenchSource 48.5%—Not comparable
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 44.0%—Not comparable
AA Harvey LABSource 7.5%—Not comparable
AA Tau3 BankingSource 27.6%—Not comparable
CyberGymSource —79.0%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource —60.3%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource —33.3%Not comparable
JobBenchSource —38.9%Not comparable
ExploitGymSource —6.0%Not comparable
CodingClaude Opus 4.8 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-5.4Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 88.6%—Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 69.2%57.7%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
SWE MultilingualSource 84.4%—Not comparable
SWE MultimodalSource 38.4%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 74.6%—Not comparable
cursorBench31Source 58.4%—Not comparable
cursorBench32Source 62.3%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 74.3%71.0%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Terminal-Bench HardSource 58.3%57.6%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 53.5%56.6%GPT-5.4 leads
FrontierCodeSource 46.5%—Not comparable
AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Source 84.6%—Not comparable
LiveCodeBench ProSource —87.5%Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource —85.3%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource —67.42%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-5.4Result
AA-LCRSource 67.7%74.0%GPT-5.4 leads
CritPtSource 20.9%23.4%GPT-5.4 leads
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.8 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-5.4Result
GPQASource 93.6%92.8%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
GPQA-DSource 93.6%92.8%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
HLESource 57.9%52.1%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
HLE w/o toolsSource 49.8%39.8%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 55.7%51.4%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 92.0%92.0%Tie
AA-HLESource 45.7%41.6%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 27.4%5.7%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 46.6%50.0%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 35.9%88.6%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
HealthBench HardSource —40.1%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (Text)Source —59.6%Not comparable
HealthBench ProfessionalSource —48.1%Not comparable
MathClaude Opus 4.8 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-5.4Result
USAMO 2026Source 96.7%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 47.241%47.600%GPT-5.4 leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 31.250%27.100%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-5.4Result
INCLUDESource 87.6%—Not comparable
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.8 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-5.4Result
OfficeQA ProSource 66.2%53.2%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
ScreenSpot ProSource 87.9%85.4%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
CharXivSource 89.9%82.8%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
CharXiv w/o toolsSource 80.5%—Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12811264Claude Opus 4.8 leads
MMMU-ProSource —81.2%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
GDPval-AASource —1672Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource —78.4%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-5.4Result
AA-IFBenchSource 62.2%73.9%GPT-5.4 leads
Frequently Asked Questions (6)

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.8 or GPT-5.4?

Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.4 are tied on the provisional overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.8 or GPT-5.4?

Claude Opus 4.8 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 62.7 versus 57.6. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.8 or GPT-5.4?

Claude Opus 4.8 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 76.4 versus 57.7. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, Claude Opus 4.8 or GPT-5.4?

Claude Opus 4.8 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 53.9 versus 42.5. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Opus 4.8 or GPT-5.4?

Claude Opus 4.8 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 80.3 versus 77.2. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Opus 4.8 or GPT-5.4?

Claude Opus 4.8 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 77 versus 73.2. Inside this category, Design Arena Website is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Anthropic Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 12, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.