Comparison page
GPT-5.4 vs Claude Opus 4.1
Compare flagship OpenAI and Anthropic pricing for complex reasoning and enterprise assistants.
Side-by-side pricing
The table uses the same example request on both models so you can compare flagship reasoning and enterprise workflows without changing the prompt shape.
Input 1,000 / Output 250
| Model | Input / 1M | Cached input / 1M | Output / 1M | Example request | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GPT-5.4 OpenAI's latest flagship general-purpose model for complex work. | $2.50 | No public rate | $15.0 | $0.0063 | OpenAI pricing |
Claude Opus 4.1 Anthropic's current flagship model for complex reasoning and analysis. | $15.0 | No public rate | $75.0 | $0.034 | Anthropic pricing |
When to choose each model
GPT-5.4
Choose GPT-5.4 when you want the economics or capability profile of OpenAI and you can justify the published rate.
Claude Opus 4.1
Choose Claude Opus 4.1 when you need the second option in this comparison and want to test whether it lowers spend without hurting the workflow.
Use cases
- • Drafting or editing long-form business content.
- • Agent loops that need strong instruction following.
- • Budget reviews where you need a premium-model baseline.
If the prompt is noisy or repetitive, run it through the prompt optimizer first.
If the brief is too loose, use the context engineer to tighten the instructions before you compare models again.
For the broader pricing strategy, read the LLM cost optimization pillar and the cost-per-million-tokens cheat sheet.
FAQ
Which model is cheaper for standard requests?
OpenAI's GPT-5.4 is cheaper on the current public token rates, so it is the default starting point for cost-sensitive flagship comparisons.
Why compare these two models?
They are both premium reasoning models, so this pair is a natural reference point when the goal is quality first and cost second.
Should I use the calculator too?
Yes. The comparison page gives you a quick ordering, while the calculator turns your actual prompt into a request-level estimate.