Which model is better: Claude 4 Opus or Claude Opus 5.5?
Claude Opus 5.5 is 73.3% cheaper for input tokens ($4.00 vs. $15.00 per 1M tokens) and $20.00 vs. $75.00 for output tokens (3.8x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, Claude Opus 5.5 delivers lower response latency at 680ms TTFT (240ms faster than Claude 4 Opus) with 95 vs. 46 tok/s throughput. Claude Opus 5.5 leads coding evaluations at 89.9% SWE-bench Verified vs. 77.2% for Claude 4 Opus and 93.2% vs. 87.1% on GPQA Diamond.
Verified daily via automated API latency tests and official documentation.
Zero-Shot RAG Verified
Verified Performance & Unit Economics Delta (12 Dimensions)
Daily synchronized metrics across token pricing, prompt cache economics, latency, throughput, and 5 capability benchmarks.
Metric / Dimension
Claude 4 Opus
Claude Opus 5.5
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$15.00
$4.00
Claude Opus 5.5 is 3.8x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$75.00
$20.00
Claude Opus 5.5 (73.3% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$1.500
$0.200
Claude Opus 5.5 is 7.5x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$18.75
$5.00
Claude Opus 5.5 is 3.8x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
205k (64k out)
1,024k (128k out)
Claude Opus 5.5 (5.0x larger context)
Avg TTFT Response Latency
920ms
680ms
Claude Opus 5.5 (240ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
46 tok/s
95 tok/s
Claude Opus 5.5 (+49 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
77.2%
89.9%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+12.7% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
87.1%
93.2%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+6.1% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
91.8%
92.1%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+0.3% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
98.1%
98%
Claude 4 Opus (+0.1% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
43.6 / 100
57.8 / 100
Claude Opus 5.5 (+14.2 pts)
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.
Choose Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) for top-ranked frontier intelligence leader for autonomous multi-step agentic coding, repository-scale migrations, and complex scientific reasoning at a 40% lower workload cost than Opus 5 — offering a 1,024k context window, 680ms TTFT, and $4.00/1M input pricing ($0.200/1M cached reads).
Which is cheaper: Claude 4 Opus or Claude Opus 5.5?
Claude Opus 5.5 is cheaper at $4.00/1M input tokens ($20.00/1M output) compared to $15.00/1M input ($75.00/1M output) for Claude 4 Opus.
Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: Claude 4 Opus or Claude Opus 5.5?
Claude Opus 5.5 delivers faster first-token latency at 680ms TTFT (95 tok/s throughput) compared to 920ms TTFT (46 tok/s) for Claude 4 Opus.
How do Claude 4 Opus and Claude Opus 5.5 compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude 4 Opus scores 77.2% versus 89.9% for Claude Opus 5.5. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude 4 Opus scores 87.1% versus 93.2% for Claude Opus 5.5 (and 98.1% vs 98% on MATH-500).
When should you choose Claude 4 Opus?
Choose Claude 4 Opus (Anthropic) for mission-critical R&D, long-horizon autonomous coding tasks, complex theorem proving, and executive strategic synthesis — offering a 204k context window, 920ms TTFT, and $15.00/1M input pricing ($1.500/1M cached reads).
When should you choose Claude Opus 5.5?
Choose Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) for top-ranked frontier intelligence leader for autonomous multi-step agentic coding, repository-scale migrations, and complex scientific reasoning at a 40% lower workload cost than Opus 5 — offering a 1,024k context window, 680ms TTFT, and $4.00/1M input pricing ($0.200/1M cached reads).
