Best reasoning
OpenAI: GPT-5.4
57
Highest reasoning score from the currently public benchmark fields.
This is the premium-buyer matchup: GPT-5.4 and Claude Opus 4.6 both aim at teams willing to pay for capability, but they reach that case through different workflow strengths.
Use GPT-5.4 when coding posture, OpenAI compatibility, and agent-style work matter most. Use Claude Opus 4.6 when you want an Anthropic flagship alternative with premium quality positioning and you are comfortable paying for it.
Biggest tradeoff
Neither model is a budget answer. The real question is whether you want the OpenAI path for tool-heavy technical work or the Anthropic path for a premium general-purpose alternative with similar buyer intent.
Quick Decision Cards
These cards call out the most useful early distinctions without hiding the fact that different public fields may point to different winners.
Highest reasoning score from the currently public benchmark fields.
Best coding posture from AA Coding Index, LiveCodeBench, or SWE Bench when present.
Lowest currently published input-token price.
Largest resolved context window from the public detail dataset.
Use-Case Framing
Best for enterprise buyers narrowing a premium shortlist to OpenAI versus Anthropic.
Best when the purchase decision is less about price minimization and more about which high-end profile fits internal workflows.
Best when benchmark ceilings and premium support posture matter more than bargain pricing.
Full Matrix
Missing values stay visible as N/A, and softly tinted cells mark the leading value in each comparable row so the matrix scans faster.
Overview
Decision-first fields that summarize fit before the deeper benchmark matrix.
| Field | Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 anthropic | OpenAI: GPT-5.4 openai |
|---|---|---|
| Creator | anthropic | openai |
| Overall profile | Selective fit | Selective fit |
| Best for | Long-context research / Multimodal | Long-context research / Agent workflows |
| Vision support | Yes | Yes |
| New in 2026 | Yes | Yes |
Intelligence / Reasoning
Broad reasoning quality, knowledge depth, and flagship benchmark posture.
| Field | Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 anthropic | OpenAI: GPT-5.4 openai |
|---|---|---|
| Reasoning label | Situational | Situational |
| Intelligence score | 47 | 57 |
| Intelligence Index | 46.5 | 57.2 |
| AA Intelligence Index | 46.5 | 57.0 |
| MMLU Pro | N/A | N/A |
| GPQA | 84.0% | 92.0% |
| HLE | 18.6% | 41.6% |
| Arena ELO | N/A | N/A |
Coding
Signals that matter for code generation, refactors, debugging, and software tasks.
| Field | Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 anthropic | OpenAI: GPT-5.4 openai |
|---|---|---|
| Coding score | 48 | 57 |
| AA Coding Index | 47.6 | 57.3 |
| LiveCodeBench | N/A | N/A |
| LiveBench | N/A | N/A |
| SWE Bench | N/A | N/A |
| SciCode | 45.7% | 56.6% |
Math
Published math-oriented signals, including both summary indexes and narrower benchmark cuts.
| Field | Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 anthropic | OpenAI: GPT-5.4 openai |
|---|---|---|
| Math score | N/A | N/A |
| AA Math Index | N/A | N/A |
| Math 500 | N/A | N/A |
| AIME | N/A | N/A |
| AIME 25 | N/A | N/A |
Agent / Tool Use
Signals that better reflect tool loops, long-running tasks, and agent-style workflows.
| Field | Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 anthropic | OpenAI: GPT-5.4 openai |
|---|---|---|
| Agent score | 59 | 74 |
| IFBench | 44.6% | 73.9% |
| TAU2 | 84.8% | 91.5% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 48.5% | 57.6% |
| LCR | 58.3% | 74.0% |
Latency / Speed
Interactive responsiveness and throughput signals from the public detail dataset.
| Field | Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 anthropic | OpenAI: GPT-5.4 openai |
|---|---|---|
| Latency tier | Heavy | Heavy |
| Speed label | Situational | Limited |
| Speed score | 44 | 26 |
| Tokens per second | 48 | 72 |
| TTFT | 2.03s | 173.45s |
| AA Tokens per second | 49 | 75 |
| AA TTFT | 1.43s | 176.97s |
| First answer token | 1.43s | 176.97s |
Pricing
Published token pricing plus the lower-level OpenRouter and Artificial Analysis cost fields.
| Field | Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 anthropic | OpenAI: GPT-5.4 openai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid-range | Mid-range |
| Price label | Competitive | Competitive |
| Price score | 62 | 62 |
| Input price | $5.00 | $2.50 |
| Output price | $25.00 | $15.00 |
| AA input price | $5.00 | $2.50 |
| AA output price | $25.00 | $15.00 |
| AA blended 3:1 | $10.00 | $5.63 |
| OR prompt price | $5.0000 | $2.5000 |
| OR completion price | $25.0000 | $15.0000 |
| OR request price | N/A | N/A |
| OR image price | N/A | N/A |
| OR audio price | N/A | N/A |
| OR web search price | $0.0100 | $0.0100 |
| OR cache read price | $0.0000 | $0.0000 |
| OR cache write price | $0.0000 | N/A |
| OR internal reasoning price | N/A | N/A |
Context
Window size and completion limits relevant to long-context tasks and workspace planning.
| Field | Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 anthropic | OpenAI: GPT-5.4 openai |
|---|---|---|
| Context tier | Large | Large |
| Context label | Above average | Above average |
| Context score | 100 | 100 |
| Primary context window | 1000K Tokens | 1050K Tokens |
| OpenRouter context length | 1000K Tokens | 1050K Tokens |
| Top provider context | 1000K Tokens | 1050K Tokens |
| Max completion tokens | 128000 | 128000 |
Modality / Vision
Modalities stay visible near the decision surface so multimodal support is easy to compare.
| Field | Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6 anthropic | OpenAI: GPT-5.4 openai |
|---|---|---|
| Vision support | Yes | Yes |
| Modalities | text, image->text, image | text, image, file->text, file |
| OpenRouter modality | text+image->text | text+image+file->text |
| OR input modalities | text, image | text, image, file |
| OR output modalities | text | text |
Provider Internals
FAQ
Curated pages handle editorial intent. The leaderboard handles discovery. Custom compare URLs stay available for working sessions without being promoted as canonical landing pages.