Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. Claude Opus 5.5vsGPT-5.4
Updated Sep 2026

Claude Opus 5.5vsGPT-5.4

GPT-5.4 is cheaper than Claude Opus 5.5 at $2.5/M vs $4/M input tokens.

Claude Opus 5.5 and GPT-5.4 compared across 19 shared prompts
SpecClaude Opus 5.5GPT-5.4
Input price$4/M tokens$2.5/M tokens
Output price$20/M tokens$15/M tokens
Context window1.0M tokens1.1M tokens
WeightsClosedClosed
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedSep 2026Mar 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 19 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Mini LBO Underwrite

You are underwriting a 5-year LBO for a private equity investment committee. Company (fictional): HarborTech Services (HTS) –…

Claude Opus 5.5900 words
HarborTech Services: 5-Year LBO Underwriting Conventions: $m. Interest is charged on beginning-of-year balances, which avoids circularity. Term Loan (TL) amortization is 1% of the original $480m, or $4.8m per year. Mezz PIK accrues to principal. All FCF after mandatory debt service sweeps to the TL.
Read the full answer
GPT-5.41,258 words
Below is a simplified 5-year LBO model for HarborTech Services (HTS) using only the assumptions provided. Entry, sources & uses Purchase price FY2025 EBITDA = $120.0m Entry multiple = 12.0x Enterprise Value = 12.0 × 120.0 = $1,440.0m Fees Transaction fees = 2.0% of EV = 2.0% × 1,440.0 = $28.8m Uses Purchase of…
Read the full answer

Michelin Star Recipe Design

Design an innovative recipe for a multi-component dish worthy of a Michelin 3-star restaurant. The recipe should feature an unusual…

Claude Opus 5.52,253 words
"Hive & Tide" Langoustine, Beeswax, White Chocolate & Oscietra Caviar, Hay-Baked Celeriac, Fermented Green Strawberry, Sea Buckthorn I. The Concept Most coastal menus celebrate the meeting of sea and land. This dish is about a stranger, quieter meeting: the meadow and the seabed, the bee and the langoustine.
Read the full answer
GPT-5.42,210 words
Dish Concept Hay-Smoked Duck, White Chocolate–Parsnip Velouté, Burnt Mandarin, Black Garlic-Licorice Jus, and Buckwheat Tuile with Oscietra Caviar Conceptual Narrative This dish explores the tension between pastoral warmth and urban refinement. At its core is duck: primal, luxurious, and deeply savory.
Read the full answer

Startup Pitch Teardown

Here's a pitch deck summary for a startup called "MindMeld AI": **Slide 1 - Vision:** "We're building the future of human-AI collaboration.…

Claude Opus 5.5936 words
The 3 Weakest Claims in the MindMeld AI Pitch "Decodes neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy. Works with any language, any device." (Slide 3) Why it's weak: It far exceeds the published state of the art. The best results for thought-to-text come from invasive implants.
Read the full answer
GPT-5.41,049 words
Here are the 3 weakest claims in the deck, with why they’re weak and how to improve them. “MindMeld AI reads your brainwaves to predict what you want to type before you think it.” Why this is weak This is the weakest claim because it sounds scientifically incoherent and overhyped.
Read the full answer

Adversarial Contract Review

Here is a contract for a software consulting engagement: --- SOFTWARE CONSULTING AGREEMENT This Agreement is entered into between TechCorp…

Claude Opus 5.54,420 words
Contractor-Side Review of the Software Consulting Agreement Overall assessment: This agreement is heavily one-sided. Nearly every clause shifts risk, cost, or control to the Contractor, and several provisions interact to create compounding exposure.
Read the full answer
GPT-5.42,522 words
Here are the main contractor-unfriendly clauses, why they’re risky, and concrete redlines you should consider. This is business/legal information, not legal advice; for an actual engagement, a lawyer in the relevant jurisdiction should review it.
Read the full answer

Advanced Longevity Plan (Biohacker)

Develop a comprehensive, cutting-edge 3-month longevity plan for a biohacker aiming to optimize longevity, physical and cognitive…

Claude Opus 5.53,099 words
The 90-Day Longevity & Performance Protocol A structured, measurable plan for the experienced biohacker How to Use This Plan Philosophy: Measure → Intervene → Re-measure. Every intervention has a hypothesis, a metric, and a decision rule.
Read the full answer
GPT-5.42,946 words
Below is a high-level, educational 12-week framework for “longevity-oriented performance optimization.” It is not medical advice and shouldn’t replace care from a physician, especially because some interventions biohackers use can interact with medications, affect liver/kidney function, sleep, mood, blood pressure…
Read the full answer

Ethical Dilemma with Stakeholders

You're the CEO of a pharmaceutical company. Your best-selling drug ($2B annual revenue, used by 4 million patients for chronic pain) has…

Claude Opus 5.51,853 words
The Next 48 Hours: CEO Action Plan The Core Decision We disclose. The question is how to do it well, not whether. Before the schedule, here are the three facts that drive every decision below. 1. The harm is concrete.
Read the full answer
GPT-5.42,705 words
I would act as if this will become public soon, because ethically and practically that is the safest assumption. The core principle: patient safety first, evidence preserved, regulators informed promptly, and no misleading statements to investors or physicians.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Claude Opus 5.5
Claude Opus 5.5
GPT-5.4
GPT-5.4

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, nothing separates them.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Claude Opus 5.5
Input
$4.00
Output
$20.00
GPT-5.4
Input
$2.50
1.6× cheaper
Output
$15.00
1.3× cheaper

GPT-5.4 is cheaper on both: 1.6× input, 1.3× output.

Where to run it

7 hosts, cheapest first

Claude Opus 5.54 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
Amazon Bedrock$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·99.8% upAzure AI Foundry$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% upAnthropic$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% upGoogle Vertex AI$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% up
GPT-5.43 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
Azure AI Foundry$2.50 in·$15.00 out·1.1M·100% upOpenAI$2.50 in·$15.00 out·1.1M·99.9% upAmazon Bedrock$2.75 in·$16.50 out·1.1M—

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 25 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Claude Opus 5.5 is developed by Anthropic while GPT-5.4 is developed by OpenAI. Claude Opus 5.5 has a 1.0M token context window vs GPT-5.4's 1.1M. You can compare their actual outputs across 19 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Claude Opus 5.5 and GPT-5.4 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 19 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4/M input tokens and GPT-5.4 costs $2.5/M input tokens. GPT-5.4 is $1.50/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Claude Opus 5.5 and GPT-5.4 across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

Claude Opus 5.5 logoSolar Mini 4 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
GPT-5.4 logoQwen3.8 Max Prime logo
GPT-5.4 vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGLM 5.3 Prime logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLanded Sep 2026
GPT-5.4 logoQwen3.8 Omni Flash logo
GPT-5.4 vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoCommand A+ logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Command A+Landed Sep 2026
GPT-5.4 logoGPT-6 Luna Pro logo
GPT-5.4 vs GPT-6 Luna ProLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGPT-6 Sol Pro logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6 Sol ProLanded Sep 2026
GPT-5.4 logoGPT-6 Luna logo
GPT-5.4 vs GPT-6 LunaLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Claude Opus 5.5 logoClaude Opus 4.6 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6Same lab
Claude Opus 5.5 logoClaude Fable 5.1 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Fable 5.1Same lab
GPT-5.4 logoGPT-5.4 Pro logo
GPT-5.4 vs GPT-5.4 ProVersion compare
GPT-5.4 logoGPT-6 Sol Pro logo
GPT-5.4 vs GPT-6 Sol ProSame lab
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGPT-5.2 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-5.2Cross-provider
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGPT-5.2 Chat logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-5.2 ChatSame size
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGPT-5.2 Pro logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-5.2 ProCross-provider
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGPT-5.3 Chat logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-5.3 ChatSame size

Model pages

Claude Opus 5.5 logo
Claude Opus 5.519 outputs, specs and price
GPT-5.4 logo
GPT-5.453 outputs, specs and price
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed