claude-opus-5-5 vs gpt-6-astra
claude-opus-5-5 vs gpt-6-astra: $4/$20 vs $10/$50 per 1M, the same workload priced on both; claude-opus-5-5 is 60% cheaper per request.
| claude-opus-5-5 | gpt-6-astra | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider · tier | anthropic · frontier | openai · frontier |
| Input | $4 | $10 |
| Cached input | $0.2 | $1 |
| Cache write | $5 | $12.5 |
| Output | $20 | $50 |
| Long-context tier | none | > 272,000: $20 / $75 |
| Per request (2,000 in / 300 out) | $0.014 | $0.035 |
| Per month at 100k requests | $1,400 | $3,500 |
| …with the static prefix cached | $830 | $2,150 |
| Cheaper sibling (cascade) | claude-sonnet-5-5 | gpt-6.1-sol |
Through TokenZero
Point your SDK at the gateway and keep both keys; the cache formatter, response cache and advisory routing act on every request, and each one comes back with a signed receipt showing the list-price baseline, actual cost and the saving.
OPENAI_BASE_URL=https://tokenzero.sh/w/<key>/v1 ANTHROPIC_BASE_URL=https://tokenzero.sh/w/<key>
Questions
Which is cheaper, claude-opus-5-5 or gpt-6-astra?
At list prices (table 2026-10-26) claude-opus-5-5 is 60% cheaper per request on a 2,000-in / 300-out workload. Quality is a separate question: TokenZero's cascade only routes to a sibling it scores as sufficient and measures parity with shadow evaluation.
Where do these prices come from?
The providers' own pricing pages, re-verified on 2026-10-26; the gateway signs receipts with the same table.