Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
GPT-5 Nano vs Claude Opus 4.1
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
Claude Opus 4.1 wins on 5/8 benchmarks
Claude Opus 4.1 wins 5 of 8 shared benchmarks. Leads in knowledge · coding.
Category leads
math·GPT-5 Nanoknowledge·Claude Opus 4.1coding·Claude Opus 4.1
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
GPT-5 Nano
#114 by perf·no signal
Claude Opus 4.1
#137 by perf·no signal
Best value
GPT-5 Nano
219.4x better value than Claude Opus 4.1
GPT-5 Nano
201.3 pts/$
$0.23/M
Claude Opus 4.1
0.9 pts/$
$45.00/M
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
Anthropic
$380.0B·Tier 1
Head to head
8 benchmarks · 2 models
GPT-5 NanoClaude Opus 4.1
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
GPT-5 Nano leads by +1.0
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
GPT-5 Nano
8.3
Claude Opus 4.1
7.2
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
Claude Opus 4.1 leads by +2.1
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
GPT-5 Nano
2.1
Claude Opus 4.1
4.2
GPQA diamond
Claude Opus 4.1 leads by +10.4
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
GPT-5 Nano
59.3
Claude Opus 4.1
69.7
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
GPT-5 Nano leads by +12.2
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
GPT-5 Nano
81.1
Claude Opus 4.1
68.9
SimpleQA Verified
Claude Opus 4.1 leads by +22.6
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
GPT-5 Nano
12.2
Claude Opus 4.1
34.8
Terminal Bench
Claude Opus 4.1 leads by +26.5
Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence.
GPT-5 Nano
11.5
Claude Opus 4.1
38.0
VPCT
GPT-5 Nano leads by +3.3
VPCT (Visual Pattern Completion Test) · tests visual reasoning and pattern recognition by having models complete visual sequences and transformations.
GPT-5 Nano
5.8
Claude Opus 4.1
2.5
WeirdML
Claude Opus 4.1 leads by +4.7
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
GPT-5 Nano
38.1
Claude Opus 4.1
42.8
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Nano | Claude Opus 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning. | 8.3 | 7.2 |
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning. | 2.1 | 4.2 |
GPQA diamond Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs. | 59.3 | 69.7 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 81.1 | 68.9 |
SimpleQA Verified SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information. | 12.2 | 34.8 |
Terminal Bench Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence. | 11.5 | 38.0 |
VPCT VPCT (Visual Pattern Completion Test) · tests visual reasoning and pattern recognition by having models complete visual sequences and transformations. | 5.8 | 2.5 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 38.1 | 42.8 |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $0.05 | $0.40 | 400K tokens (~200 books) | $1.38 | |
| $15.00 | $75.00 | 200K tokens (~100 books) | $300.00 |
People also compared