// head_to_head

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Hermes 4 405B

Published LiveBench scores across all seven categories, live list pricing, context windows, and the measured cost of a point of capability — for both models, side by side.

OpenRouter + LiveBenchAll comparisonsFull leaderboard

Hermes 4 405B is the cheaper of the two; neither can be ranked on quality here.

Hermes 4 405B does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

anthropic

Claude Opus 5.5

Blended / 1M
$8.00
Context
1M
Released
Sep 22, 2026
Overall score
83.2
reasoningtool callingimage inputfile inputprompt caching

nousresearch

Hermes 4 405B

Blended / 1M
$1.50
Context
131K
Released
Aug 26, 2025
Overall score
Not evaluated
reasoning

Specs and pricing

MetricClaude Opus 5.5Hermes 4 405B
LiveBench overall

Mean of the seven LiveBench category scores, 0–100. Higher is better.

83.2
Cost per point

Measured benchmark spend divided by overall score — dollars per point of capability.

$0.4474
Blended price / 1M

3:1 input:output mix, the usual shape of production traffic.

$8.00$1.50win
Input price / 1M$4.00$1.00win
Output price / 1M$20.00$3.00win
Cached input / 1M

Price of an input token served from the prompt cache, where the provider publishes one.

$0.200
Context window1Mwin131K
Max output tokens128K118K

Benchmarks by category

An overall score averages away the thing you probably care about. These are the seven LiveBench categories scored separately — Claude Opus 5.5 on top, Hermes 4 405B below, both out of 100.

Agentic coding
71.7
Coding
89.3
Reasoning
92.2
Mathematics
97.1
Data analysis
80.3
Language
86.3
Instruction following
65.7

What each one costs to run

Per-token prices are hard to feel. These are monthly list costs for both models across five workload shapes, using each provider's published cached-input rate where there is one.

WorkloadClaude Opus 5.5Hermes 4 405B
Support chatbot

1.2K in / 400 out × 200K requests

$2,286/mo$480.00/mo
RAG assistant

8K in / 600 out × 100K requests

$2,880/mo$980.00/mo
Coding agent

40K in / 4K out × 20K requests

$2,672/mo$1,040/mo
Document extraction

20K in / 1.5K out × 50K requests

$5,310/mo$1,225/mo
Bulk classification

500 in / 20 out × 5M requests

$10,100/mo$2,800/mo
Run these two through the cost calculator

Which should you pick?

You need to fit large documents in one call

Claude Opus 5.5

Wider context window — 1M against 131K.

You are cost-constrained

Hermes 4 405B

Cheaper on blended list price at $1.50 per million tokens.

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Hermes 4 405B FAQ

Which is better, Claude Opus 5.5 or Hermes 4 405B?

Hermes 4 405B is the cheaper of the two; neither can be ranked on quality here. Hermes 4 405B does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 cheaper than Hermes 4 405B?

Hermes 4 405B is cheaper. On a 3:1 input:output blend, Claude Opus 5.5 lists at $8.00 per million tokens and Hermes 4 405B at $1.50 — Hermes 4 405B is 5.3× cheaper. Input and output are priced separately — Claude Opus 5.5 charges $4.00 in and $20.00 out, Hermes 4 405B charges $1.00 and $3.00 — so the model that looks cheaper flips depending on how output-heavy your workload is.

Does Claude Opus 5.5 or Hermes 4 405B have a bigger context window?

Claude Opus 5.5 has the larger context window: 1M for Claude Opus 5.5 against 131K for Hermes 4 405B. Note that a window you can fill is not a window you should fill — retrieval quality usually degrades well before the limit, and you pay for every token you put in it.

Do Claude Opus 5.5 and Hermes 4 405B support prompt caching?

Claude Opus 5.5 publishes a cached-input rate of $0.200 per million tokens against a full input rate of $4.00. The catalogue lists no separate cached rate for Hermes 4 405B, which means the provider does not price it separately here — not that caching is unavailable.

Related comparisons

How these numbers are produced

  • Price — provider list price from OpenRouter, refreshed every 15 minutes. “Blended” is a 3:1 input:output mix.
  • ScoresLiveBench release 2026-06-25, using their own category map. Each model shows its strongest published run. A blank means “not evaluated”, never “bad”.
  • Cost per point — the measured dollars LiveBench spent on the run, divided by the score it earned.
  • “Win” — awarded only past a threshold: one full point on a benchmark score, 10% on a price, 25% on a context window. Anything tighter reports as a tie, because effort settings alone move a LiveBench score by more than that.

Published benchmarks rank models on someone else's tasks. Before committing, see LLM & agent evaluation for building an eval on your own.