Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.5 vs OpenAI: GPT-4o
Side-by-side specs, pricing, and benchmarks. Pick a winner for your team's use case.
Use it in a Space
Spin up a Switchy Space with either model — your whole team @-mentions it with shared context, pooled credits, one memory.
Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.5OpenAI: GPT-4o
Input $/Mtok$5.00 · $2.50
Output $/Mtok$25.00 · $10.00
Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.5OpenAI: GPT-4o
Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.5200K tokens
OpenAI: GPT-4o128K tokens
Bars use square-root scaling so a 1M-token window doesn't crush a 200K one.
Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.5OpenAI: GPT-4o
2025-11-24
2024-05-13
2024-04-13today
Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.5
- Provider
- anthropic
- Context
- 200k
- Input $/Mtok
- $5.00
- Output $/Mtok
- $25.00
- Max output
- 64000
- Modalities
- file, image, text
OpenAI: GPT-4o
- Provider
- openai
- Context
- 128k
- Input $/Mtok
- $2.50
- Output $/Mtok
- $10.00
- Max output
- 16384
- Modalities
- text, image, file
Price delta
Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.5 is $2.50/Mtok more expensive than OpenAI: GPT-4o on input. Output: Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.5 is $15.00/Mtok more expensive than OpenAI: GPT-4o.
Which to pick
Pick **Claude Opus 4.5** when the conversation requires deep reasoning, careful multi-step planning, or rigorous long-document synthesis — Opus consistently leads GPT-4o on hard reasoning evals and on tasks where the model has to plan before answering. The price (six times GPT-4o's input rate, 7.5x its output) is the cost of admission; reach for Opus on the small number of turns where being wrong is expensive.
Pick **GPT-4o** for everyday multimodal team chat: vision over screenshots and charts, document layout extraction, audio in/out, and lower-stakes reasoning. At $2.50 in / $10 out per Mtok it is the right default any time the question doesn't actually need Opus-grade thinking — and GPT-4o still leads on integrated voice and image-output workflows where Opus has no equivalent.