Apodex 1.1 vs Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback)
Which is better for the money: Apodex 1.1 by Apodex or Claude Opus 5.5 (High, 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 (High, Default Fallback) scores 27.2 points higher (53.6 vs 26.4) but costs 2.3× as much to run the benchmark ($2172 vs $939; flagship vs premium cost classes). Pick Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Apodex 1.1.
| Metric | Apodex 1.1 | Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 26.4 | 53.6 | +103.0% Claude Opus 5.5 (High… is 2.0× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $939.06 | $2,172.43 | +131.3% Claude Opus 5.5 (High… is 2.3× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | Not reported | 33.81s | — 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 (High, Default Fallback) vs Apodex 1.1: 103.0% more intelligence, 131.3% 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 (High, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
Apodex 1.1Claude Opus 5.5 (High, 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-high · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/apodex-1-1/claude-opus-5-5-high?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill