Compare · ModelsLive · 3 picked · head to head
Claude Opus 4.6 vs GPT-5.1 vs GPT-5.4
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
GPT-5.4 wins on 17/30 benchmarks
GPT-5.4 wins 17 of 30 shared benchmarks. Leads in agentic · knowledge · general.
Category leads
agentic·GPT-5.4reasoning·Claude Opus 4.6arena·Claude Opus 4.6knowledge·GPT-5.4general·GPT-5.4math·GPT-5.4coding·Claude Opus 4.6
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
Claude Opus 4.6
#136 by perf·#9 by attention
GPT-5.1
#138 by perf·#4 by attention
GPT-5.4
#104 by perf·#4 by attention
Best value
GPT-5.1
1.4x better value than GPT-5.4
Claude Opus 4.6
3.2 pts/$
$15.00/M
GPT-5.1
8.6 pts/$
$5.63/M
GPT-5.4
6.0 pts/$
$8.75/M
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
Anthropic
$965.0B·Tier 1
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
Head to head
30 benchmarks · 3 models
Claude Opus 4.6GPT-5.1GPT-5.4
APEX-Agents
GPT-5.4 leads by +6.1
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
Claude Opus 4.6
46.3
GPT-5.1
17.5
GPT-5.4
52.4
ARC-AGI
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +0.3
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
Claude Opus 4.6
94.0
GPT-5.1
72.8
GPT-5.4
93.7
ARC-AGI-2
GPT-5.4 leads by +4.8
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
Claude Opus 4.6
69.2
GPT-5.1
17.6
GPT-5.4
74.0
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +142.0
Claude Opus 4.6
1537.0
GPT-5.1
1341.0
GPT-5.4
1395.0
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +32.5
Claude Opus 4.6
1497.3
GPT-5.1
1438.5
GPT-5.4
1464.8
Chess Puzzles
GPT-5.4 leads by +12.6
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
Claude Opus 4.6
12.7
GPT-5.1
28.4
GPT-5.4
41.1
Cl Bench
GPT-5.4 leads by +4.2
Claude Opus 4.6
20.7
GPT-5.1
23.7
GPT-5.4
27.9
Cl Bench Life
GPT-5.4 leads by +4.4
Claude Opus 4.6
17.0
GPT-5.1
17.3
GPT-5.4
21.7
DeepResearch Bench
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +12.5
DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses.
Claude Opus 4.6
55.3
GPT-5.1
42.8
GPT-5.4
35.1
Dtbench
GPT-5.4 leads by +5.3
Claude Opus 4.6
85.3
GPT-5.1
83.5
GPT-5.4
90.7
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
GPT-5.1 leads by +6.9
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
Claude Opus 4.6
40.7
GPT-5.1
54.5
GPT-5.4
47.6
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
GPT-5.4 leads by +4.2
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
Claude Opus 4.6
22.9
GPT-5.1
20.8
GPT-5.4
27.1
GPQA diamond
GPT-5.4 leads by +3.7
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
Claude Opus 4.6
87.4
GPT-5.1
83.5
GPT-5.4
91.1
GSO-Bench
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +9.8
GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues.
Claude Opus 4.6
41.2
GPT-5.1
13.7
GPT-5.4
31.4
HLE
GPT-5.4 leads by +1.9
HLE (Humanity's Last Exam) · a reasoning benchmark designed to be the hardest public evaluation of AI. Questions span mathematics, physics, philosophy, and logic · curated to be at or beyond the frontier of human expert capability. Tested with and without tool augmentation. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 46.9% without tools and 54.7% with tools · making it one of the few benchmarks where the top score is below 60%.
Claude Opus 4.6
31.1
GPT-5.1
19.8
GPT-5.4
33.0
Lmca
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +4.5
Claude Opus 4.6
65.6
GPT-5.1
51.6
GPT-5.4
61.1
Mystery Game Puzzles
GPT-5.4 leads by +13.2
Claude Opus 4.6
17.4
GPT-5.1
10.8
GPT-5.4
30.6
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
GPT-5.4 leads by +3.3
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
Claude Opus 4.6
94.4
GPT-5.1
88.6
GPT-5.4
97.8
SimpleQA Verified
GPT-5.1 leads by +1.0
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
Claude Opus 4.6
47.0
GPT-5.1
48.0
GPT-5.4
45.1
SWE-Bench verified
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +1.9
SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability.
Claude Opus 4.6
78.7
GPT-5.1
68.0
GPT-5.4
76.9
Terminal Bench
GPT-5.4 leads by +2.0
Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence.
Claude Opus 4.6
79.8
GPT-5.1
47.6
GPT-5.4
81.8
WeirdML
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +0.3
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
Claude Opus 4.6
78.0
GPT-5.1
60.8
GPT-5.4
77.7
Ebr Bench
GPT-5.4 leads by +12.7
Claude Opus 4.6
12.7
GPT-5.4
25.4
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private
GPT-5.4 leads by +22.2
Claude Opus 4.6
26.8
GPT-5.4
49.0
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private
GPT-5.4 leads by +12.6
Claude Opus 4.6
66.0
GPT-5.4
78.6
Furniture Assembly
GPT-5.4 leads by +10.7
Claude Opus 4.6
0.0
GPT-5.4
10.7
Metr Time Horizons
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +4.5
Claude Opus 4.6
78.9
GPT-5.4
74.3
PostTrainBench
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +5.8
Claude Opus 4.6
24.8
GPT-5.4
19.0
Proofbench
GPT-5.4 leads by +6.0
Claude Opus 4.6
50.0
GPT-5.4
56.0
SimpleBench
Claude Opus 4.6 leads by +17.3
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
Claude Opus 4.6
61.1
GPT-5.1
43.8
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | GPT-5.1 | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|---|
APEX-Agents APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments. | 46.3 | 17.5 | 52.4 |
ARC-AGI ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization. | 94.0 | 72.8 | 93.7 |
ARC-AGI-2 ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data. | 69.2 | 17.6 | 74.0 |
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding | 1537.0 | 1341.0 | 1395.0 |
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall | 1497.3 | 1438.5 | 1464.8 |
Chess Puzzles Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities. | 12.7 | 28.4 | 41.1 |
Cl Bench | 20.7 | 23.7 | 27.9 |
Cl Bench Life | 17.0 | 17.3 | 21.7 |
DeepResearch Bench DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses. | 55.3 | 42.8 | 35.1 |
Dtbench | 85.3 | 83.5 | 90.7 |
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning. | 40.7 | 54.5 | 47.6 |
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning. | 22.9 | 20.8 | 27.1 |
GPQA diamond Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs. | 87.4 | 83.5 | 91.1 |
GSO-Bench GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues. | 41.2 | 13.7 | 31.4 |
HLE HLE (Humanity's Last Exam) · a reasoning benchmark designed to be the hardest public evaluation of AI. Questions span mathematics, physics, philosophy, and logic · curated to be at or beyond the frontier of human expert capability. Tested with and without tool augmentation. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 46.9% without tools and 54.7% with tools · making it one of the few benchmarks where the top score is below 60%. | 31.1 | 19.8 | 33.0 |
Lmca | 65.6 | 51.6 | 61.1 |
Mystery Game Puzzles | 17.4 | 10.8 | 30.6 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 94.4 | 88.6 | 97.8 |
SimpleQA Verified SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information. | 47.0 | 48.0 | 45.1 |
SWE-Bench verified SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability. | 78.7 | 68.0 | 76.9 |
Terminal Bench Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence. | 79.8 | 47.6 | 81.8 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 78.0 | 60.8 | 77.7 |
Ebr Bench | 12.7 | — | 25.4 |
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private | 26.8 | — | 49.0 |
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private | 66.0 | — | 78.6 |
Furniture Assembly | 0.0 | — | 10.7 |
Metr Time Horizons | 78.9 | — | 74.3 |
PostTrainBench | 24.8 | — | 19.0 |
Proofbench | 50.0 | — | 56.0 |
SimpleBench SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking. | 61.1 | 43.8 | — |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $5.00 | $25.00 | 1.0M tokens (~500 books) | $100.00 | |
| $1.25 | $10.00 | 400K tokens (~200 books) | $34.38 | |
| $2.50 | $15.00 | 1.1M tokens (~525 books) | $56.25 |