Roboflow

Claude Opus 4 vs GPT-5 Mini

Compare Claude Opus 4 and GPT-5 Mini side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Object Detection, Open Prompt, and Classification.

Compare Claude Opus 4 vs GPT-5 Mini live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
AnthropicClaude Opus 4

Claude Opus 4 is deprecated and can no longer be run. Details and evals are still available on its model page.

OpenAIGPT-5 Mini
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Anthropic

Claude Opus 4 vs GPT-5 Mini: Overview

Claude Opus 4

Claude 4 Opus, released by Anthropic in May 2025, is the flagship model of the Claude 4 family, built for complex, long-horizon reasoning and advanced coding workflows. It is multimodal, supporting text (including voice), images, and tool use, and operates as a hybrid reasoning model—able to deliver quick answers in fast mode or switch to extended thinking for deeper, multi-step problem solving. With a ~200,000-token context window and a training cutoff around March 2025, it is optimized for handling large documents, long conversations, and sophisticated agentic tasks.

Positioned at the high end of Anthropic’s offerings, Opus 4 achieves state-of-the-art results on coding benchmarks like SWE-Bench (72.5%) and Terminal-Bench (43.2%). It is best suited for research, enterprise automation, and software development at scale. The model is classified at Anthropic’s ASL-3 safety level, denoting advanced oversight and safety features.

GPT-5 Mini

GPT-5 Mini, released by OpenAI on August 7, 2025, is a mid-tier variant of the GPT-5 family that balances cost, speed, and capability. It is multimodal, supporting both text and image inputs, and offers a substantial input context window of ~400,000 tokens with output lengths up to ~128,000 tokens. While less powerful than the full GPT-5, it inherits its safety tuning, instruction-following improvements, and multimodal reasoning, making it a practical choice for developers who need large context handling without the expense of premium models.

GPT-5 Mini is optimized for affordability while retaining strong reasoning performance. Benchmarks show it outperforming earlier models such as GPT-4o on many multimodal and medical VQA tasks, though it lags behind GPT-5 on the most complex problems. Ideal use cases include prototyping, scalable content generation, document analysis, and mid-range reasoning tasks where efficiency and context capacity matter more than top-tier accuracy.

Claude Opus 4 vs GPT-5 Mini Comparison Table

PropertyClaude Opus 4GPT-5 Mini
OrganizationAnthropicOpenAI
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateMay 2025Aug 2025
Context Window200K400K
Parameters
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$15.00$0.250
Output $/1M$75.00$2.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemo
ClassificationDemo
Object DetectionDemo
OCRDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts
Score key:≥75%40–74%<40%
Visual Understanding
Overall Score
56.72%
73.13%
Avg Response Time19.74s11.72s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens1.4K
Median output tokens143
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0006
Defect Detection
66.7%(10/15)
80%(12/15)
Document Understanding
88.9%(8/9)
77.8%(7/9)
Object Counting
0%(0/10)
10%(1/10)
Object Understanding
64.3%(9/14)
85.7%(12/14)
Spatial Understanding
57.9%(11/19)
89.5%(17/19)
OCR
Overall Score
76.86%
Avg Response Time4.63s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens105
Median output tokens209
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0004
Focused Scene OCR
72.7%(72/99)
Handwritten Math
50%(5/10)
License Plate Recognition
93.3%(28/30)
Text Recognition
80%(24/30)
VQA & Extraction
78.3%(47/60)

Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology