Which model is better: Claude Opus 5.5 or OpenAI o3-mini?
OpenAI o3-mini is 72.5% cheaper for input tokens ($1.10 vs. $4.00 per 1M tokens) and $4.40 vs. $20.00 for output tokens (3.6x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, Claude Opus 5.5 delivers lower response latency at 680ms TTFT (270ms faster than OpenAI o3-mini) with 95 vs. 98 tok/s throughput. Claude Opus 5.5 leads coding evaluations at 89.9% SWE-bench Verified vs. 49.3% for OpenAI o3-mini and 93.2% vs. 79.7% 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 Opus 5.5
OpenAI o3-mini
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$4.00
$1.10
OpenAI o3-mini is 3.6x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$20.00
$4.40
OpenAI o3-mini (78.0% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$0.200
$0.550
Claude Opus 5.5 is 2.8x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$5.00
$1.10
OpenAI o3-mini is 4.5x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
1,024k (128k out)
205k (100k out)
Claude Opus 5.5 (5.0x larger context)
Avg TTFT Response Latency
680ms
950ms
Claude Opus 5.5 (270ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
95 tok/s
98 tok/s
OpenAI o3-mini (+3 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
89.9%
49.3%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+40.6% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
93.2%
79.7%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+13.5% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
92.1%
83.2%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+8.9% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
98%
97.9%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+0.1% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
57.8 / 100
59.7 / 100
OpenAI o3-mini (+1.9 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).
Choose OpenAI o3-mini (OpenAI) for competitive math reasoning, automated unit test generation, and structured logic pipelines — offering a 204k context window, 950ms TTFT, and $1.10/1M input pricing ($0.550/1M cached reads).
Which is cheaper: Claude Opus 5.5 or OpenAI o3-mini?
OpenAI o3-mini is cheaper at $1.10/1M input tokens ($4.40/1M output) compared to $4.00/1M input ($20.00/1M output) for Claude Opus 5.5.
Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: Claude Opus 5.5 or OpenAI o3-mini?
Claude Opus 5.5 delivers faster first-token latency at 680ms TTFT (95 tok/s throughput) compared to 950ms TTFT (98 tok/s) for OpenAI o3-mini.
How do Claude Opus 5.5 and OpenAI o3-mini compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude Opus 5.5 scores 89.9% versus 49.3% for OpenAI o3-mini. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude Opus 5.5 scores 93.2% versus 79.7% for OpenAI o3-mini (and 98% vs 97.9% on MATH-500).
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).
When should you choose OpenAI o3-mini?
Choose OpenAI o3-mini (OpenAI) for competitive math reasoning, automated unit test generation, and structured logic pipelines — offering a 204k context window, 950ms TTFT, and $1.10/1M input pricing ($0.550/1M cached reads).
