Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) vs GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) by OpenAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-27.
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) scores 8.8 points higher (42.3 vs 33.5) but costs 5.6× as much to run the benchmark ($860 vs $154; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 33.5, and GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) when 33.5 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) | GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 42.3 | 33.5 | −20.8% GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-re… is 20.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $860.33 | $153.58 | −82.1% GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-re… is 82.1% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 12.23s | 6.51s | −46.8% GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-re… is 46.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $1.00 / $5.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) vs Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback): 20.8% less intelligence, 82.1% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 46.8% faster end-to-end.
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Max) scores 38.10 for $122.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-low/gpt-6-1-terra-non-reasoning · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-low/gpt-6-1-terra-non-reasoning?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill