Which model is better: Claude Opus 5.5 or OpenAI o4-mini?
OpenAI o4-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, Both models demonstrate comparable response latency around 680ms TTFT (95 vs. 125 tok/s). Claude Opus 5.5 leads coding evaluations at 89.9% SWE-bench Verified vs. 68.1% for OpenAI o4-mini and 93.2% vs. 81.4% 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 o4-mini
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$4.00
$1.10
OpenAI o4-mini is 3.6x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$20.00
$4.40
OpenAI o4-mini (78.0% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$0.200
$0.275
Claude Opus 5.5 is 1.4x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$5.00
$1.10
OpenAI o4-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
680ms
Identical Latency
Generation Speed (Throughput)
95 tok/s
125 tok/s
OpenAI o4-mini (+30 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
89.9%
68.1%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+21.8% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
93.2%
81.4%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+11.8% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
92.1%
85.6%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+6.5% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
98%
97.8%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+0.2% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
57.8 / 100
63.7 / 100
OpenAI o4-mini (+5.9 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).
Which is cheaper: Claude Opus 5.5 or OpenAI o4-mini?
OpenAI o4-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 o4-mini?
Both Claude Opus 5.5 and OpenAI o4-mini deliver comparable response times around 680ms TTFT.
How do Claude Opus 5.5 and OpenAI o4-mini compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude Opus 5.5 scores 89.9% versus 68.1% for OpenAI o4-mini. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude Opus 5.5 scores 93.2% versus 81.4% for OpenAI o4-mini (and 98% vs 97.8% 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 o4-mini?
Choose OpenAI o4-mini (OpenAI) for automated PR review, high-volume agentic coding loops, SQL/data analysis, and visual document reasoning — offering a 204k context window, 680ms TTFT, and $1.10/1M input pricing ($0.275/1M cached reads).
