Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 4.1 vs GPT-5.2 Pro

Claude Opus 4.1 costs 2.2x less per output token than GPT-5.2 Pro ($75.00 vs $168.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 4 benchmarks have a result for both.

Claude Opus 4.1Anthropic
Coding
No data
Overall
50.2
Output $/M
$75.00
1
GPT-5.2 ProOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$168.00
3
vs boards won of 4 shared

Claude Opus 4.1 or GPT-5.2 Pro: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Claude Opus 4.1 for output tokens 2.2x cheaper ($75.00 vs $168.00 per million) and work measured by Epoch Capabilities Index or FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3, where it leads.

Shared results
4
Claude Opus 4.1 only
69
GPT-5.2 Pro only
3
Like-for-like categories
3 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Claude Opus 4.1 not benchmarked, GPT-5.2 Pro not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 52.5 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3: Claude Opus 4.1 12.6% against GPT-5.2 Pro 74.0%, 61.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 4.1 $75.00 against GPT-5.2 Pro $168.00 per million output tokens, 2.2x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 4.1 takes 200K tokens, GPT-5.2 Pro 400K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryClaude Opus 4.1BarsGPT-5.2 ProTies
Intelligence01
Reasoning10
Math02
All shared boards13
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index9 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5.2 Pro
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5.2 ProLeader
LMArena WebDev1390Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)66.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Terminal-Bench38.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
WeirdML45.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Cybench42.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding1479Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1456Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1399Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
SciCode4.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5.2 Pro
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5.2 ProLeader
AA Intelligence Index22.8Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index144.1156.3GPT-5.2 Pro
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5.2 Pro
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5.2 ProLeader
METR time horizons66.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
GDPval43.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
DeepResearch Bench48.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5.2 Pro
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5.2 ProLeader
GPQA Diamond76.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)77.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)77.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
ARC-AGINot measured90.5%Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured54.2%Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured
SimpleBench60.0%57.4%Claude Opus 4.1
Chess puzzlesNot measured60.0%Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured
Mystery game puzzles21.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
EBR-bench7.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
VPCT35.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1442Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: expert1438Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1451Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5.2 Pro
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5.2 ProLeader
AIME78.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)95.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)94.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
OTIS Mock AIME68.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 312.6%74.0%GPT-5.2 Pro
FrontierMath, tier 42.4%46.0%GPT-5.2 Pro
LMArena Text: math1431Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1434Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5.2 Pro
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5.2 ProLeader
MMLU Pro87.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)73.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)61.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)93.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)47.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: science1422Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1416Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1421Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1406Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
FACTS Benchmark Suite40.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5.2 Pro
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5.2 ProLeader
Design Arena: websites1177Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: UI components1165Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: game dev1171Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: data viz1166Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: 3D1153Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1171Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: SVG1152Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1167Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5.2 Pro
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5.2 ProLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)31.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)73.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
DTBench80.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMCA37.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)84.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text1419Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1435Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1412Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: English1433Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1405Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1427Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: German1413Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1377Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1381Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: French1433Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1448Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1422Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1413Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1444Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1455Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1418Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1398Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5.2 Pro
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5.2 ProLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$0.052Fits in one request
GPT-5.2 Pro$0.105Fits in one request

Claude Opus 4.1 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$0.975Fits in one request
GPT-5.2 Pro$1.55Fits in one request

Claude Opus 4.1 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$3.75Exceeds the context window
GPT-5.2 Pro$5.88Fits in one request

Claude Opus 4.1 costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5.2 Pro
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 4.1OpenAI GPT-5.2 Pro
MakerAnthropicOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedAugust 5, 2025December 10, 2025
Context window200K400K
Input $/Mtok$15.00$21.00
Output $/Mtok$75.00$168.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than GPT-5.2 Pro for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Claude Opus 4.1 for output tokens 2.2x cheaper ($75.00 vs $168.00 per million) and work measured by Epoch Capabilities Index or FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or GPT-5.2 Pro?

Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15.00 per million input tokens and $75.00 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 Pro costs $21.00 and $168.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.1 or GPT-5.2 Pro?

GPT-5.2 Pro, with 400K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.1 vs GPT-5.2 Pro comparison based on?

4 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Claude Opus 4.1's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and GPT-5.2 Pro's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next