Apodex 1.1 vs Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback)
Which is better for the money: Apodex 1.1 by Apodex or Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) by Anthropic? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 31.2 points higher (57.6 vs 26.4) but costs 9.3× as much to run the benchmark ($8708 vs $939; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 26.4, and Apodex 1.1 when 26.4 is enough.
| Metric | Apodex 1.1 | Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 26.4 | 57.6 | +118.2% Claude Opus 5.5 (Max,… is 2.2× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $939.06 | $8,708.20 | +827.3% Claude Opus 5.5 (Max,… is 9.3× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | Not reported | 626.13s | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $3.00 | $4.00 / $20.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) vs Apodex 1.1: 118.2% more intelligence, 827.3% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Apodex 1.1 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
Apodex 1.1Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback)Today's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/apodex-1-1/claude-opus-5-5 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/apodex-1-1/claude-opus-5-5?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill