Claude Opus 5 (High) vs GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5 (High) by Anthropic or GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) by OpenAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5 (High) scores 27.4 points higher (48.1 vs 20.7) but costs 13× as much to run the benchmark ($4332 vs $331; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5 (High) when you need intelligence above 20.7, and GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) when 20.7 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (High) | GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 48.1 | 20.7 | −57.0% GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is 57.0% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,331.68 | $331.24 | −92.4% GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is 92.4% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 26.50s | 93.46s | +252.7% GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is 252.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $25.0 | $0.20 / $1.25 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) vs Claude Opus 5 (High): 57.0% less intelligence, 92.4% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 252.7% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5 (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
- GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Claude Opus 5 (High)GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh)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/claude-opus-5-high/gpt-5-4-nano · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-high/gpt-5-4-nano?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill