# Claude Opus 4.1 vs GPT-5.4

> GPT-5.4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 59.5 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-1-vs-gpt-5-4
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 42

## Summary

- They share 42 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 0 categories and GPT-5.4 in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.4 leads 73.3 to 22.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 12.6% for Claude Opus 4.1 and 78.6% for GPT-5.4.
- GPT-5.4 is cheaper at $2.50 / $15 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.1.
- GPT-5.4 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 59.5 |
| Rank | 136 | 14 |
| Context | 200K | 1.05M |
| Input $/M | $15 | $2.50 |
| Output $/M | $75 | $15 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4.1: 44.3 (#69)
- GPT-5.4: 52.8 (#28)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3% | 76.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1390 | 1465 |
| WeirdML | 45.9% | 77.7% |
| LMArena Coding | 1479 | 1497 |
| ALE-Bench | 674.77 | 1,607 |
| AlgoTune | 1.34 | 1.85 |
| DeepSWE | — | 51.8% |
| SciCode | — | 56.6% |
| GSO | — | 31.4% |
| MirrorCode | — | 15.6% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4.1: 34.8 (#38)
- GPT-5.4: 46.5 (#12)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 38% | 81.8% |
| DeepResearch Bench | 48.3% | 35.1% |
| LMArena Search | 1148 | 1197 |
| METR Time Horizons | 66.8% | 74.3% |
| APEX-Agents | — | 52.4% |
| GDPval | 43.6% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 39.4% |
| Cybench | 42% | — |
| PostTrainBench | — | 19% |
| GBAEval | — | 45.1% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 6,144 |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 4.1: 31.6 (#70)
- GPT-5.4: 61.7 (#17)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 7% | 44% |
| EnigmaEval | 7.2% | 16% |
| EBR-Bench | 7.9% | 25.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1485 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 21% | 37% |
| DTBench | 80% | 94.4% |
| LMCA | 37.1% | 52% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.11 | 156.92 |
| ForecastBench | 62 | 59.5 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 74% |
| SimpleBench | 60% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 63.8% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 91.3% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 93.7% |
| CritPt | — | 23.4% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 80% |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4.1: 22.0 (#267)
- GPT-5.4: 73.3 (#14)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 12.6% | 78.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | 49% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 68.9% | 97.8% |
| LMArena Math | 1430 | 1488 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 7.2% | 47.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | 27.1% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 83.1% |
| ProofBench | — | 56% |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4.1: 41.9 (#93)
- GPT-5.4: 65.3 (#13)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 77.3% | 93.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 11.5% | 36.2% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | 7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1507 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 45.1% |
| Confabulations | 17.1% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4.1: 26.2 (#114)
- GPT-5.4: 43.8 (#19)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1302 |
| VPCT | 35% | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 27.1% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 37.5% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1471 |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4.1: 52.1 (#90)
- GPT-5.4: 56.4 (#22)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 1465 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1427 | 1520 |
| LMArena French | 1432 | 1493 |
| LMArena German | 1412 | 1472 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1378 | 1484 |
| LMArena Korean | 1381 | 1449 |
| LMArena Russian | 1421 | 1480 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | 1453 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4.1: 75.8 (#53)
- GPT-5.4: 77.3 (#25)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1436 | 1469 |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#60)
- GPT-5.4: 50.3 (#8)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1474 |
| CL-bench | — | 27.9% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 21.7% |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4.1: 62.6 (#70)
- GPT-5.4: 72.1 (#18)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-5.4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1469 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1412 | 1439 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1444 | 1482 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.7% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1840 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1272 |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than GPT-5.4?

GPT-5.4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 59.5 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or GPT-5.4?

GPT-5.4 is cheaper. It lists at $2.50 per million input tokens and $15 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.

### Is Claude Opus 4.1 or GPT-5.4 better for coding?

GPT-5.4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.8 versus 44.3 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.4 does, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5.4 share?

42 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.4 has 68.