Model Comparison
GPT-6 Astra (max)
vs. Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback)
Comparing 2 AI models · 0 benchmarks · OpenAI, Anthropic
Recommended Pick
AnClaude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback)9 metric winsStrongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback)
100.0 value score
56.0 reasoning / $8.00/1M
Lowest Price
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback)
$4.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback)
56.0 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
GPT-6 Astra (max)
76.9 coding index
Differences That Matter
Best value
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback) is 2.5x cheaper on input tokens than GPT-6 Astra (max).
Speed gap
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback) generates about 1.3x as many tokens per second as GPT-6 Astra (max).
Reasoning gap
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback) leads GPT-6 Astra (max) by 3.3 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback) wins 9 measurable categories, including Value, Input price, Output price, Blended price.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
GPT-6 Astra (max)
OpenAI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Secure AI Chat made in Europe
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-6 Astra (max) | Top Pick An Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $10.00/1M | $4.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $50.00/1M | $20.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $20.00/1M | $8.00/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | OpenAI | Anthropic |
| Release Date | Sep 3, 2026 | Sep 17, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 57.7 tok/s | 74.3 tok/s |
| TTFT | 323740ms | 170230ms |
| Latency | 323740ms | 170230ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 37.6 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 52.7 | 56.0 |
| Intelligence | 52.7 | 56.0 |
| Coding | 76.9 | — |
Key Takeaways
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback) offers the best value at $4.00/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 56.0 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
GPT-6 Astra (max) reaches a 76.9 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-6 Astra (max)
- Code generation
- Software development
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
