GPT-5 vs Claude Opus 4
The two top frontier reasoning models head-to-head — context, pricing, coding and agentic strength. Updated for 2026.
| Spec | GPT-5 | Claude Opus 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Anthropic |
| Model | GPT-5 | Claude Opus 4 |
| Context window | 400,000 tokens | 200,000 tokens |
| Input price | ~$5 / Mtok | ~$15 / Mtok |
| Output price | ~$15 / Mtok | ~$75 / Mtok |
| Reasoning mode | Built-in (auto thinking) | Extended thinking |
| Coding (SWE-bench) | Top tier | State of the art |
| Agent tool use | Strong, native tools | Best-in-class long-horizon |
| Best for | Multimodal, broad ecosystem, cheaper at scale | Coding, multi-step agents, careful writing |
FAQ
Is GPT-5 better than Claude Opus 4?
It depends on workload. GPT-5 has a larger context (400k vs 200k) and is cheaper per token. Claude Opus 4 still leads coding (SWE-bench) and long-horizon agentic tasks like running for hours inside a coding agent.
Which is more expensive?
Claude Opus 4 is the most expensive frontier model — roughly 3× GPT-5 on input and 5× on output. For high-volume work, most teams use Claude Sonnet or GPT-5, reserving Opus for the hardest steps.
Which is better for coding agents?
Claude Opus 4 is the default model in agentic coding tools (Claude Code, Cursor, Cline) thanks to reliable tool calling over many steps. GPT-5 has closed the gap and is preferred when cost matters.
Which has a bigger context window?
GPT-5 wins on raw size at 400k tokens vs Claude Opus 4's 200k. For million-token jobs, look at Gemini 2.5 Pro instead.