Model Comparison
GPT-5.4 nano (medium)
vs. Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)
Comparing 2 AI models · 7 benchmarks · OpenAI, Anthropic
Recommended Pick
AnClaude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)7 metric winsStrongest on: Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence
Best Value
GPT-5.4 nano (medium)
100.0 value score
40.3 reasoning / $0.46/1M
Lowest Price
GPT-5.4 nano (medium)
$0.20/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)
68.8 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)
77.0 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-5.4 nano (medium) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
GPT-5.4 nano (medium) is 25x cheaper on input tokens than Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort).
Reasoning gap
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort) leads GPT-5.4 nano (medium) by 28.4 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort) wins 7 measurable categories, including Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence, GPQA.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
GPT-5.4 nano (medium)
OpenAI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Chat with leading AI models
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | Op GPT-5.4 nano (medium) | Top Pick An Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.20/1M | $5.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $1.25/1M | $25.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.46/1M | $10.00/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | OpenAI | Anthropic |
| Release Date | Mar 17, 2026 | Jul 24, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 54.6 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 19969ms |
| Latency | — | 19969ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 7.9 |
| Reasoning Score | 40.3 | 68.8 |
| Intelligence | 30.2 | 60.1 |
| Coding | — | 77.0 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 76.1% | 93.7% |
| HLE | 14.7% | 52.5% |
| SciCode | 38.4% | 55.0% |
| LCR | 57.3% | 68.7% |
| IFBench | 64.4% | — |
| TAU-bench v2 | 52.6% | — |
| TerminalBench Hard | 33.3% | — |
Key Takeaways
GPT-5.4 nano (medium) offers the best value at $0.20/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 68.8 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort) reaches a 77.0 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
GPT-5.4 nano (medium)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
