Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 4.1 vs GPT-5 Nano

Updated October 21, 2026. 59 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace Claude Opus 4.1 Replace GPT-5 Nano
Claude Opus 4.1Anthropic
Coding
27.2
Overall
22.8
Output $/M
$75.00
53
GPT-5 NanoOpenAI
Coding
34.8
Overall
13.0
Output $/M
$0.40
5
vs boards won of 59 shared, 1 tied

Decision reading

Pick GPT-5 Nano for coding: it scores 34.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 27.2 for Claude Opus 4.1.

Pick Claude Opus 4.1 when what matters is Terminal-Bench or WeirdML, where it leads.

Model AClaude Opus 4.1Anthropic27.2/1001 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BGPT-5 NanoOpenAI34.8/1001 independent benchmark$0.109 per solved task
Shared results
59
Claude Opus 4.1 only
12
GPT-5 Nano only
26
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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 27.2 from 1 benchmark, GPT-5 Nano 34.8 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
General, 18.0 points apart on average over 20 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LegalBench (Vals AI): Claude Opus 4.1 83.5% against GPT-5 Nano 50.1%, 33.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 4.1 $75.00 against GPT-5 Nano $0.40 per million output tokens, 187.5x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 4.1 takes 200K tokens, GPT-5 Nano 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 NanoTies
Coding41
Intelligence20
Reasoning71
Math431 tie
Knowledge100
Web design60
General200
All shared boards5351 tie
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index41
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5 NanoLeader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured34.8%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena WebDev1390Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)66.5%70.2%GPT-5 Nano
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured78.9%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured17.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Terminal-Bench38.0%21.8%Claude Opus 4.1
WeirdML45.9%38.1%Claude Opus 4.1
Cybench42.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding14791351Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: software and IT14561345Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena WebDev: HTML1399Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5 NanoLeader
AA Intelligence Index22.813.0Claude Opus 4.1
Epoch Capabilities Index144.1139.2Claude Opus 4.1
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5 NanoLeader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured36.5%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
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 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index71
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5 NanoLeader
GPQA Diamond76.3%63.4%Claude Opus 4.1
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)77.5%70.9%Claude Opus 4.1
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured67.6%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured9.5%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)77.3%69.4%Claude Opus 4.1
ARC-AGINot measured20.7%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured2.6%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
SimpleBench60.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured22.0%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Mystery game puzzles21.0%9.0%Claude Opus 4.1
EBR-bench7.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
VPCT35.0%37.2%GPT-5 Nano
LMArena Text: hard prompts14421328Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: expert14381321Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14511338Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1141Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1157Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index43
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5 NanoLeader
AIME78.2%81.2%GPT-5 Nano
MATH 500 (Vals AI)95.4%93.8%Claude Opus 4.1
MGSM (Vals AI)94.4%89.3%Claude Opus 4.1
AA Math IndexNot measured83.7Only GPT-5 Nano measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured83.7%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
OTIS Mock AIME68.9%81.1%GPT-5 Nano
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 312.6%20.0%GPT-5 Nano
FrontierMath, tier 42.4%2.4%Tie
ProofBenchNot measured12.0%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MATH level 5Not measured95.2%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: math14311317Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: mathematical work14341326Claude Opus 4.1
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index100
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5 NanoLeader
MMLU Pro87.9%76.1%Claude Opus 4.1
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.5%50.1%Claude Opus 4.1
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured52.6%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)73.7%67.4%Claude Opus 4.1
MortgageTax (Vals AI)61.1%53.6%Claude Opus 4.1
MedQA (Vals AI)93.6%93.3%Claude Opus 4.1
MedCode (Vals AI)47.2%30.4%Claude Opus 4.1
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured78.0%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured11.7%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: science14221318Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14161335Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: legal and government14211298Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: business and finance14061311Claude Opus 4.1
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5 NanoLeader
Design Arena: websites11771101Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: UI components11641066Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: game dev11721045Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: data viz11661056Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: 3D1153966Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: all code categories11711084Claude Opus 4.1
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
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index200
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5 NanoLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)31.4%30.4%Claude Opus 4.1
MedScribe (Vals AI)73.9%72.9%Claude Opus 4.1
IFBenchNot measured67.6%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured45.0%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
DTBench80.0%62.7%Claude Opus 4.1
LMCA37.1%7.9%Claude Opus 4.1
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured44.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)84.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text14191320Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: instruction following14351306Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: creative writing14121249Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena VisionNot measured1159Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: English14331321Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: non-English14051313Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Chinese14271356Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: German14131327Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Japanese13771227Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Korean13811269Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: French1433Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish14481360Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Russian14221296Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Polish14131314Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: multi-turn14441311Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: longer queries14551312Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: writing and language14181283Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13981268Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1170Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1176Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1152Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1110Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 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 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1GPT-5 NanoLeader
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 Nano$0.0003Fits in one request

GPT-5 Nano costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$0.975Fits in one request
GPT-5 Nano$0.0037Fits in one request

GPT-5 Nano costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$3.75Exceeds the context window
GPT-5 Nano$0.014Fits in one request

GPT-5 Nano 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 Nano
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 4.1OpenAI GPT-5 Nano
MakerAnthropicOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedAugust 5, 2025August 7, 2025
Context window200K400K
Input $/Mtok$15.00$0.05
Output $/Mtok$75.00$0.40
Coding index27.234.8
Independent measurements behind it11
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.109
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than GPT-5 Nano for coding?

Pick GPT-5 Nano for coding: it scores 34.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 27.2 for Claude Opus 4.1. Pick Claude Opus 4.1 when what matters is Terminal-Bench or WeirdML, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or GPT-5 Nano?

Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15.00 per million input tokens and $75.00 per million output tokens; GPT-5 Nano costs $0.05 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5 Nano only.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.1 or GPT-5 Nano?

GPT-5 Nano, with 400K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.1 vs GPT-5 Nano comparison based on?

59 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 Nano's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next