| Signal | Claude Opus 4.5 | Delta | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 100 | -- | |
Benchmarks | 89 | +89 | |
Pricing | 25 | -75 | |
Context window size | 84 | -5 | |
Recency | 100 | -- | |
Output Capacity | 80 | -5 | |
| Overall Result | 1 wins | of 6 | 3 wins |
4
days ranked higher
1
days
25
days ranked higher
Anthropic
OpenAI
Claude Opus 4.5 saves you $8750.00/month
That's $105000.00/year compared to GPT-5.2 Pro at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.5 | GPT-5.2 Pro | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 92 | 96 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
| Rank | #21 | #10 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
| Quality Rank | #21 | #10 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
| Adoption Rank | #21 | #10 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 200K | 400K | GPT-5.2 Pro |
| Pricing | $5.00/$25.00/M | $21.00/$168.00/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 100 | 100 | Claude Opus 4.5 |
| Benchmarks | 89 | -- | Claude Opus 4.5 |
| Pricing | 25 | 100 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
| Context window size | 84 | 89 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
| Recency | 100 | 100 | Claude Opus 4.5 |
| Output Capacity | 80 | 85 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
Our composite score (0–100) combines six weighted signals: benchmark performance (25%), pricing efficiency (25%), context window size (15%), model recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and capability versatility (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 92/100 (rank #21), placing it in the top 93% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 96/100 (rank #10), placing it in the top 97% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 3-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal — your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
Claude Opus 4.5 offers 84% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $450.00/month with Claude Opus 4.5 vs $2835.00/month with GPT-5.2 Pro — a $2385.00 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. Claude Opus 4.5 also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (400K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($25.00/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (96/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input — can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
GPT-5.2 Pro has a moderate advantage with a 3.200000000000003-point lead in composite score. It wins on more signal dimensions, but Claude Opus 4.5 has specific strengths that could make it the better choice for certain workflows.
Best for Quality
Claude Opus 4.5
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Claude Opus 4.5
84% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Claude Opus 4.5
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Claude Opus 4.5
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Claude Opus 4.5
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Anthropic
| Capability | Claude Opus 4.5 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Anthropic
OpenAI
Claude Opus 4.5 saves you $200.40/month
That's 84% cheaper than GPT-5.2 Pro at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Claude Opus 4.5 | GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 200K | 400K |
| Max Output Tokens | 64,000 | 128,000 |
| Open Source | No | No |
| Created | Nov 24, 2025 | Dec 10, 2025 |
GPT-5.2 Pro scores 96/100 (rank #10) compared to Claude Opus 4.5's 92/100 (rank #21), giving it a 3-point advantage. GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger overall choice, though Claude Opus 4.5 may excel in specific areas like cost efficiency.
Claude Opus 4.5 is ranked #21 and GPT-5.2 Pro is ranked #10 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (25%), pricing (25%), context window (15%), recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and versatility (10%). Scores update hourly.
Claude Opus 4.5 is cheaper at $25.00/M output tokens vs GPT-5.2 Pro's $168.00/M output tokens — 6.7x more expensive. Input token pricing: Claude Opus 4.5 at $5.00/M vs GPT-5.2 Pro at $21.00/M.
GPT-5.2 Pro has a larger context window of 400,000 tokens compared to Claude Opus 4.5's 200,000 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.