Compare to

Discover how Anthropic's Claude 2.1 and Open AI's GPT-4 stack up against each other in this comprehensive comparison of two leading AI language models.

Released in November 2024 and March 2023 respectively, these models represent significant advancements in artificial intelligence, with Claude 2.1 offering a 200,000-token context window and GPT-4 featuring a 8,192-token capacity. Their distinct approaches to natural language processing are reflected in their benchmark performances, with Claude 2.1 achieving null% on MMLU and GPT-4 scoring 86.4%, making this comparison essential for developers and organizations seeking the right AI solution for their specific needs.

Models Overview

Anthropic Claude 2.1
Anthropic GPT-4

Provider

Company that developed the model
Anthropic Open AI

Context Length

Maximum number of tokens the model can process
200K undefined

Maximum Output

Maximum number of tokens the model can generate in a single response
Unknown 8192

Release Date

Date when the model was released
23-11-2024 14-03-2023

Knowledge Cutoff

Training data cutoff date
Early 2023 September 2021

Open Source

Whether the model's code is open-source
FALSE FALSE

API Providers

API providers that offer access to the model
Anthropic API, Vertex AI, AWS Bedrock OpenAI API

Pricing Comparison

Compare the pricing of Anthropic's Claude 2.1 and Open AI's GPT-4 to determine the most cost-effective solution for your AI needs.

Anthropic Claude 2.1
Anthropic GPT-4

Input Cost

Cost per million input tokens
$8 / 1M tokens $30 / 1M tokens

Output Cost

Cost per million tokens generated
$24 / 1M tokens $60 / 1M tokens

Comparing Benchmarks and Performance

Compare the performances of Anthropic's Claude 2.1 and Open AI's GPT-4 on industry benchmarks. This section provides a detailed comparison on MMLU, MMMU, HumanEval, MATH and other key benchmarks.

Anthropic Claude 2.1
Anthropic GPT-4

MMLU

Evaluating LLM knowledge acquisition in zero-shot and few-shot settings.
Benchmark not available 86.4%

MMMU

A wide ranging multi-discipline and multimodal benchmark.
Benchmark not available 34.9%

HellaSwag

A challenging sentence completion benchmark.
Benchmark not available 95.3%

GSM8K

Grade-school math problems benchmark.
Benchmark not available 92%

HumanEval

A benchmark to measure functional correctness for synthesizing programs from docstrings.
Benchmark not available 67%

MATH

Benchmark performance on Math problems ranging across 5 levels of difficulty and 7 sub-disciplines.
Benchmark not available Benchmark not available

Compare More Models