Compare AI models: Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-5 Nano
- Claude Opus 5.5AnthropicHollow points use fallbacks · hover for details
- GPT-5 NanoOpenAIHollow points use fallbacks · hover for details
ReasoningCodingCost efficiencyContext windowMultimodalTool use
| Model | Reasoning | Coding | Cost efficiency | Context window | Multimodal | Tool use |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 5.5 | 100/100 | 75/100 | 8/100 | 81/100 | 50/100 | 50/100 — Tool calling supported; no comparable benchmark |
| GPT-5 Nano | 50/100 — Reasoning supported; no comparable benchmark | 50/100 — No data; neutral placeholder | 75/100 | 72/100 | 33/100 | 50/100 — Tool calling supported; no comparable benchmark |
Overview
Author
Context length
1M
400K
Reasoning
True
True
Input modalities
Text, Image, Pdf
Text, Image
Output modalities
Text
Text
Providers
Pricing
Input
$4.00/ 1M
$0.05/ 1M
Output
$20/ 1M
$0.40/ 1M
Cached input
Unknown
Unknown
MomentumLast 2 mo
Unique users
1
6.9K
Completed sessions
2
46,585
Token share
0%
0%
Tokens
20M+100%
4.5B-8%
SEP 15NOV 9
SEP 15NOV 9
RetentionWeek 1
Returning users
Pending
Pending
Related comparisons. Other model pairs to check.
Nearby alternativeClaude Opus 5.5 vs Dracarys Llama 3.1 70B InstructClaude Opus 5.5·Dracarys Llama 3.1 70B InstructNearby alternativeGPT-5 Nano vs Dracarys Llama 3.1 70B InstructGPT-5 Nano·Dracarys Llama 3.1 70B InstructRelated comparisonClaude Opus 5.5 vs Jamba MiniClaude Opus 5.5·Jamba MiniRelated comparisonGPT-5 Nano vs Jamba MiniGPT-5 Nano·Jamba Mini