Claude Opus 5 (High) vs GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5 (High) 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.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5 (High) scores 14.6 points higher (48.1 vs 33.5) but costs 28× as much to run the benchmark ($4332 vs $154; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5 (High) when you need intelligence above 33.5, and GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) when 33.5 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (High) | GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 48.1 | 33.5 | −30.4% GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-re… is 30.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,331.68 | $153.58 | −96.5% GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-re… is 96.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 28.11s | 6.76s | −76.0% GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-re… is 76.0% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $25.0 | $1.00 / $5.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) vs Claude Opus 5 (High): 30.4% less intelligence, 96.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 76.0% faster 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-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Max) scores 38.10 for $122.
Claude Opus 5 (High)GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning)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-6-1-terra-non-reasoning · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-high/gpt-6-1-terra-non-reasoning?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill