Roboflow

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-5.4 Mini

Compare Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GPT-5.4 Mini side-by-side.

Compare Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-5.4 Mini live

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

These models don't share enough common tasks for a side-by-side demo. See the comparison table below for their capabilities.

Models in this comparison

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-5.4 Mini on Vision Evals

Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on all six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Object Detection, where Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads 74.3% to 15.8%.

Overall, Claude Sonnet 5.5 averages 83.8% (#7 of 60) against 64.7% (#43 of 60) for GPT-5.4 Mini.

GPT-5.4 Mini is both cheaper ($0.0030 vs $0.0065 per sample) and faster (5.3s vs 10.8s per sample).

Claude Sonnet 5.5GPT-5.4 Mini

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-5.4 Mini Comparison Table

Evals updated September 28, 2026Pricing updated September 28, 2026

PropertyClaude Sonnet 5.5GPT-5.4 Mini
OrganizationAnthropicOpenAI
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateSep 2026Mar 2026
Context Window1.0M400K
Parameters
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.750
Output $/1M$4.50
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
Object DetectionDemo
OCRDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
83.8%
64.7%
Avg cost / sample$0.0065$0.0030
Avg speed / sample10.78s5.25s
By task
Object Detection (low)
74.3%
±0.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.5 to 75.3
$0.0098
15.8%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 15.3 to 16.1
$0.0044
Object Detection (high)
76.8%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.5 to 77.3
$0.014
16.6%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 15.8 to 17.4
$0.030
Counting (low)
79.3%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 79.7
$0.0042
58.6%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 56.8 to 60.8
$0.0019
Counting (high)
82.9%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.1 to 83.8
$0.0053
64.9%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 63.5 to 67.6
$0.0073
Identification (low)
91.7%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 93.8
$0.0029
83.3%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 84.4
$0.0013
Identification (high)
90.6%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 90.6
$0.0033
82.3%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.1 to 84.4
$0.0055
OCR (low)
90.6%
±0.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.0 to 91.7
$0.0079
89.5%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.1 to 90.6
$0.0042
OCR (high)
90.9%
±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.2 to 92.3
$0.011
89.0%
±1.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.7 to 91.2
$0.030
Data Extraction (low)
90.7%
±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.7 to 92.8
$0.0033
84.2%
±2.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.5 to 86.6
$0.0014
Data Extraction (high)
93.1%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 92.8 to 93.8
$0.0036
82.1%
±2.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.4 to 84.5
$0.0036
Reasoning (low)
76.4%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.5 to 76.8
$0.0049
57.0%
±3.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.3 to 60.9
$0.0022
Reasoning (high)
83.9%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.1 to 85.4
$0.0061
64.0%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.9 to 65.6
$0.0096

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-5.4 Mini: Overview

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is a proprietary multimodal language model from Anthropic and the second release in the Claude 5.5 family, following Claude Opus 5.5. It accepts interleaved text and image input and returns text, operating with a 1M token context window and a maximum output of 128K tokens per request. The model uses adaptive thinking by default, allocating variable reasoning effort per request rather than exposing a manual extended thinking toggle, and its training data cutoff is June 2026. Anthropic positions it as a faster, lower cost complement to Opus 5.5 for well scoped everyday tasks, bug fixing, and producing documents, slides, and spreadsheets.

On visual and agentic evaluations reported at launch, Sonnet 5.5 scores 61.6% on Chartography, a chart recognition test, compared with 15.6% for Claude Sonnet 5, and 80.1% on OSWorld 2.1, a computer use benchmark measuring screenshot driven control of a desktop environment, compared with 57.0% for Sonnet 5. It reports 70.6% on Terminal-Bench 4.0 for agentic coding. Anthropic describes it as the first Sonnet model able to complete Pokemon Red from screenshots alone, and it generates output more than 30% faster than Sonnet 5 while using fewer tokens for equivalent work.

GPT-5.4 Mini

GPT-5.4 mini is a fast, cost-efficient model developed by OpenAI and released on March 17, 2026, optimized for high-throughput workloads and subagent orchestration. It supports text and image inputs within a 400,000-token context window, making it ideal for processing extensive visual datasets and large codebases in a single request. Designed for low-latency production environments, the model integrates with key API features including function calling, web search, and tool-based computer use, allowing it to assist in automated workflows that require navigating digital interfaces.

Compared to the previous GPT-5 mini, this version runs more than twice as fast while approaching the performance levels of the flagship GPT-5.4 on reasoning and coding benchmarks. While the larger GPT-5.4 introduces native, state-of-the-art computer-use capabilities, GPT-5.4 mini provides a scalable alternative for interpreting screenshots and reasoning over dense UI layouts. For vision tasks on Playground, it excels at extracting structured information from visual documents and assisting in agentic tasks that involve real-time interpretation of software interfaces alongside text.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Claude Sonnet 5.5 performed better. It scores higher on all six vision tasks and averages 83.8% (#7 of 60) against 64.7% (#43 of 60) for GPT-5.4 Mini. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads with 74.3% against 15.8%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

GPT-5.4 Mini is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0030 per sample against $0.0065. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

GPT-5.4 Mini is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 5.3s per inference against 10.8s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.