Head to head

Claude Opus 4.6 vs GPT-5.4

Claude Opus 4.6 (Anthropic) and GPT-5.4 (OpenAI) compared on intelligence, speed, context, and price — and which to choose. Both run on just4o.chat from one chat.

MetricClaude Opus 4.6GPT-5.4
Intelligence (AA index)4657
Output speed (tokens/sec)38.8163.4
Context window1M1.1M
Max output128K
Input price / 1M$5$2.5
Output price / 1M$25$15
Released2026-022026-03

Choose Claude Opus 4.6 if you want…

  • A comparable all-rounder — they trade blows on the headline metrics.

Choose GPT-5.4 if you want…

  • Higher intelligence (Artificial Analysis index 57)
  • Faster output (~163.4 tokens/sec)
  • Lower price ($5.63 / 1M blended)
  • Larger context window (1.1M)

Claude Opus 4.6

Opus 4.6 is the model researchers and engineers reach for when the problem genuinely cannot be chunked — loading an entire codebase, a year's worth of literature, or a complex multi-part investigation into a single session of up to 750,000 words. It tops Terminal-Bench 2.0 among frontier models for agentic coding tasks and leads BrowseComp for hard-to-locate information retrieval, reflecting a design philosophy built around sustained, autonomous work rather than quick exchanges. Scientists have noted roughly double the accuracy on computational biology and structural chemistry tasks versus its predecessor. The tradeoff is speed: at 38.8 tokens per second, it feels noticeably slower than alternatives during interactive back-and-forth. The 1M-token window is also still in beta, and users report meaningful performance degradation well before hitting its ceiling. Best suited to high-stakes tasks where depth matters more than pace.

Full Claude Opus 4.6 details →

GPT-5.4

GPT-5.4 was built for the actual work that happens inside offices — financial modeling, legal analysis, complex codebases, and multi-step document workflows — rather than for chasing narrow benchmarks. That strategic shift shows in the numbers: it matched or outperformed human professionals in 83% of head-to-head comparisons, and developers have called its coding output "flawless," with some declaring it the definitive choice for complex software engineering work. Native computer-use capabilities let it operate browsers and desktop apps directly, and it scored above the human baseline on UI interaction tasks. The 1.05 million token context window handles large codebases and lengthy legal documents in a single pass, though you need to configure it explicitly — the default is 272K. Where GPT-5.4 falls short is nuance: it tends to interpret requests too literally, missing the intent behind ambiguous prompts in ways that Claude handles more naturally. Writing personality is another common frustration, with verbose follow-up suggestions that can feel mechanical. For structured professional tasks where thoroughness and tool integration matter more than prose feel, it is the strongest model in the GPT-5 line prior to the release of GPT-5.5.

Full GPT-5.4 details →

FAQ

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.4?

GPT-5.4 leads on 4 of the headline metrics (higher intelligence (artificial analysis index 57); faster output (~163.4 tokens/sec); lower price ($5.63 / 1m blended); larger context window (1.1m)), while Claude Opus 4.6 wins on other factors. The right pick depends on your priorities.

Is Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.4 cheaper?

GPT-5.4 is cheaper at $5.63 per 1M tokens (blended), versus $10.

Can I use both Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.4?

Yes. Both are available on just4o.chat from a single chat — you can switch between them per message with no separate subscriptions.