Model Comparison
Claude Opus 4.5 (Non-reasoning)
vs. GPT-5.5 (xhigh)
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · Anthropic, OpenAI
Recommended Pick
Op GPT-5.5 (xhigh) 12 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Throughput, Reasoning
Best Value
GPT-5.5 (xhigh)
100.0 value score
66.0 reasoning / $11.25/1M
Lowest Price
Claude Opus 4.5 (Non-reasoning)
$5.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
GPT-5.5 (xhigh)
66.0 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
GPT-5.5 (xhigh)
59.1 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
GPT-5.5 (xhigh) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Speed gap
GPT-5.5 (xhigh) generates about 1.1x as many tokens per second as Claude Opus 4.5 (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
GPT-5.5 (xhigh) leads Claude Opus 4.5 (Non-reasoning) by 13.5 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
GPT-5.5 (xhigh) leads Claude Opus 4.5 (Non-reasoning) by 16.2 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
GPT-5.5 (xhigh) wins 12 measurable categories, including Value, Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Claude Opus 4.5 (Non-reasoning)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
GPT-5.5 (xhigh)
OpenAI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | An Claude Opus 4.5 (Non-reasoning) | Top Pick Op GPT-5.5 (xhigh) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $5.00/1M | $5.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $25.00/1M | $30.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $10.00/1M | $11.25/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Release Date | Nov 24, 2025 | Apr 23, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 65.3 tok/s | 74.8 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1450ms | 85970ms |
| Latency | 1450ms | 85970ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 89.4 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 52.5 | 66.0 |
| Intelligence | 43.1 | 60.2 |
| Coding | 42.9 | 59.1 |
| Math | 62.7 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 81.0% | 93.5% |
| MMLU Pro | 88.9% | — |
| HLE | 12.9% | 44.3% |
| LiveCodeBench | 73.8% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 62.7% | — |
| SciCode | 47.0% | 56.1% |
| LCR | 65.3% | 74.3% |
| IFBench | 43.0% | 75.9% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 86.3% | 93.9% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 40.9% | 60.6% |
Key Takeaways
Claude Opus 4.5 (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $5.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
GPT-5.5 (xhigh) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 66.0 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
GPT-5.5 (xhigh) reaches a 59.1 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Claude Opus 4.5 (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
GPT-5.5 (xhigh)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
