💻 Coding (SWE) WinnerGPT-6.1 Sol 86.4% SWE-bench · 96.8% HumanEval
🧠 STEM Reasoning WinnerGPT-6.1 Sol 92.4% GPQA · 98.8% MATH-500
Which model is better: Claude 4 Opus or GPT-6.1 Sol?
GPT-6.1 Sol is 86.7% cheaper for input tokens ($2.00 vs. $15.00 per 1M tokens) and $10.00 vs. $75.00 for output tokens (7.5x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, GPT-6.1 Sol delivers lower response latency at 520ms TTFT (400ms faster than Claude 4 Opus) with 135 vs. 46 tok/s throughput. GPT-6.1 Sol leads coding evaluations at 86.4% SWE-bench Verified vs. 77.2% for Claude 4 Opus and 92.4% 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
GPT-6.1 Sol
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$15.00
$2.00
GPT-6.1 Sol is 7.5x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$75.00
$10.00
GPT-6.1 Sol (86.7% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$1.500
$0.100
GPT-6.1 Sol is 15.0x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$18.75
$2.00
GPT-6.1 Sol is 9.4x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
205k (64k out)
1,075k (128k out)
GPT-6.1 Sol (5.3x larger context)
Avg TTFT Response Latency
920ms
520ms
GPT-6.1 Sol (400ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
46 tok/s
135 tok/s
GPT-6.1 Sol (+89 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
77.2%
86.4%
GPT-6.1 Sol (+9.2% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
87.1%
92.4%
GPT-6.1 Sol (+5.3% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
91.8%
91%
Claude 4 Opus (+0.8% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
98.1%
98.8%
GPT-6.1 Sol (+0.7% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
43.6 / 100
62.9 / 100
GPT-6.1 Sol (+19.3 pts)
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.
Choose GPT-6.1 Sol (OpenAI) for delivers near-GPT-6 Astra frontier accuracy at one-fifth the token cost with a 95% cache read discount for high-efficiency agentic coding, computer use, and enterprise workflow automation — offering a 1,075k context window, 520ms TTFT, and $2.00/1M input pricing ($0.100/1M cached reads).
GPT-6.1 Sol is cheaper at $2.00/1M input tokens ($10.00/1M 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 GPT-6.1 Sol?
GPT-6.1 Sol delivers faster first-token latency at 520ms TTFT (135 tok/s throughput) compared to 920ms TTFT (46 tok/s) for Claude 4 Opus.
How do Claude 4 Opus and GPT-6.1 Sol compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude 4 Opus scores 77.2% versus 86.4% for GPT-6.1 Sol. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude 4 Opus scores 87.1% versus 92.4% for GPT-6.1 Sol (and 98.1% vs 98.8% 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 GPT-6.1 Sol?
Choose GPT-6.1 Sol (OpenAI) for delivers near-GPT-6 Astra frontier accuracy at one-fifth the token cost with a 95% cache read discount for high-efficiency agentic coding, computer use, and enterprise workflow automation — offering a 1,075k context window, 520ms TTFT, and $2.00/1M input pricing ($0.100/1M cached reads).
