🔍 Read the full analysis: The 5X Question: What SemiAnalysis Uncovered In AI Subscriptions on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Get hardware and tech essentials delivered free — and shop member deals
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Access to Prime Big Deal Days deals on October 6–7
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
TL;DR
SemiAnalysis estimates that, for a tested agentic workload using mid-tier models, Claude plans provide roughly 5.4 to 5.6 times the API-equivalent value of comparable ChatGPT plans. The report also finds that both providers have changed subscription allowances as API prices shifted, while heavy use of premium models can make the plans costly to serve.
SemiAnalysis compared token allowances across major AI subscriptions and estimates that Claude plans deliver about five to six times the API-equivalent value of comparable ChatGPT plans for one tested agentic workload. The analysis also examines recent allowance changes and the costs of serving heavy users, findings that complicate any simple ranking of subscription deals.
For the comparison, SemiAnalysis measured how usage limits moved across token types, then priced the estimated allowances at each provider’s API list rates. Its central test used an agentic workload dominated by cached input: the report gives the mix as roughly 96.6% cached input, 0.4% fresh input, 2.6% cache writes and 0.3% output. The figures represent the API cost of using a plan’s full monthly allowance, not cash returned to subscribers.
On that workload, the report estimates about $211 in API-equivalent usage for a $20 ChatGPT Plus plan and $1,178 for Claude Pro, a ratio of roughly 5.6 to 1. At the $100 level, it puts ChatGPT Pro 100 at $1,055 and Claude Max 5x at $5,725, or about 5.4 to 1. At $200, its estimates are $2,084 for ChatGPT Pro 200 and $11,726 for Claude Max 20x, or about 5.6 to 1.
SemiAnalysis says the gap remains large when comparing token counts rather than dollar values, though it notes that model prices affect the dollar comparison: GPT-6.1 Sol costs less per token than Claude Opus 5.5. The report also finds that the providers’ plans return fairly consistent value per subscription dollar within their respective product lines under this test. These are estimates based on measured limits and published API prices, not a guarantee of what any subscriber will consume.
The 5x is a subsidy, not a price
SemiAnalysis metered the meters — every major AI subscription, token type by token type, converted to API list value. On the mid-tier models both labs call the daily driver, a Claude plan returns ~5–6× the API value of the matching ChatGPT plan. Real — and the least durable number in the report.
…and the plan is fully exhausted. One pool for every model.
…and the plan is only half used — Fable is capped at 50% of the limit, leaving the rest for Opus/Sonnet. That’s where the mid-tier gap compounds.
- $200 plan halved — Sol-class value down >50% (6.1 Sol cache price cut compounds it)
- Old limits kept until 29 October; new buyers cut immediately
- New $500 tier: only +21% Astra vs the old $200 — real draw is 300 TPS Ultrafast
- Ladder flattened: Pro 100/200/500 now identical per dollar; multipliers removed from pricing page
- In OpenAI’s favour: no 5-hour window on Pro plans — easier to use the full allowance
- Flat per-dollar value across all tiers, before and after
- New premium models placed at lower relative limits (Fable capped at 50%)
- Opus allowances raised ~20% (Max) / ~50% (Pro) with the 5.5 price cut — not enough to fully offset it
- Repeatedly walked back planned cuts earlier this year under pressure from OpenAI’s generosity
- Twelve months ago, OpenAI was the generous option. Positions swap.
Gross margin per plan, assuming 92% API gross margins. The subsidy lives almost entirely in Opus and Sonnet usage — Anthropic would already be near software-like subscription margins if everyone used only Fable. Subscriptions matter even more for OpenAI, where they’re a larger share of revenue.
Three identical subscriptions; one had ~20% lower limits. The provider (unnamed) confirmed an “extremely tiny” A/B test on limit balancing. Two lessons: limits can change silently, per account, at any time — and you won’t know without instrumentation. The usage bar is a percentage, not a contract.
If you’re choosing a plan this month for agentic coding on a mid-tier model, the report settles it: a Claude plan returns ~5–6× the API value of the matching ChatGPT plan. But a plan returning 58× its fee on a model served at a steeply negative margin for heavy users is a marketing budget with a usage meter. Value moves silently, gets A/B tested per account, and twelve months ago ran the other way. Use the subsidy while it exists — it’s genuinely large. Don’t build a cost model on it. Price workloads at API rates, keep a router between you and any one vendor, and benchmark open weights on your own hardware for steady volume. A deal you can’t verify isn’t a price. It’s weather.
Subscription Value Meets Compute Costs
The comparison matters because a subscription’s advertised monthly price does not show how much usage it permits, and token limits can change independently of API prices. SemiAnalysis says subscriptions account for about 10% of Anthropic revenue but may use more than 40% of its inference compute, based on the report’s rough estimates. It estimates that this mix lowers blended revenue per megawatt by about $36 million. The report says subscriptions represent a larger share of OpenAI revenue, though the supplied material does not give a specific percentage.
The cost of serving a subscriber depends on which models they use and how much of their allowance they consume. Using a 92% API gross-margin assumption, SemiAnalysis estimates that a subscriber who maxes out an Opus 5.5 plan could imply a gross margin near minus 369% for that plan; maxing out Fable 5.1 would imply about 1%. At 20% average utilization, the estimates rise to about 6% and 80%, respectively. These are scenario calculations, not reported company-wide margins.
That difference helps explain why providers may adjust limits as models and prices change. A generous allowance can attract customers, but heavy use of the most expensive models can make it costly to serve. For subscribers, a lower API price does not automatically mean a better subscription deal if the allowance stays flat or shrinks.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Recent Changes to Plan Allowances
SemiAnalysis’s comparison reflects a recent OpenAI change. The report says OpenAI roughly halved token allowances across model tiers on its $200 plan. For Sol-class models, it estimates that API-equivalent value fell by more than half because OpenAI also lowered GPT-6.1 Sol’s cached-input price. Existing $200 subscribers keep their previous limits until October 29; new purchases receive the reduced limits immediately, according to the source material.
OpenAI also introduced a $500 tier. SemiAnalysis estimates that it offers about 21% more Astra usage than the former $200 plan, and less Sol-class API-equivalent value. The report identifies 300 tokens per second in “Ultrafast” mode as the tier’s main selling point, while saying it was still testing that feature. It also says the revised Pro 100, 200 and 500 tiers now return similar tokens per dollar, and that OpenAI removed “5x more usage” and “20x more usage” multipliers from its pricing page.
Anthropic has cut API prices for newer models too. According to SemiAnalysis, Fable 5.1 reduced cache-read prices by 75% versus Fable 5 without increasing token limits. Opus 5.5 cut input and output prices by 20% and cache reads by 60% versus Opus 5; the report says allowances rose about 20% on Max and 50% on Pro, not enough to fully offset those price reductions. It says OpenAI did not raise Sol limits when version 6.1 shipped, resulting in an estimated roughly 30% reduction in API-equivalent value on the $200 plan.
best AI API usage monitoring tools
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Limits Beyond the Measured Workload
The reported ratios apply to a particular agentic workload and the model prices and limits used in the analysis. Results may differ for other tasks, token mixes, models or usage patterns. API-equivalent value also does not establish how much a typical subscriber uses, or whether a subscriber can consistently access every allowance included in the estimate.
SemiAnalysis says OpenAI’s new Ultrafast mode was still under testing. The supplied source material does not provide the test outcome, nor does it establish how the recent plan changes will affect subscriber behavior or either company’s overall profitability. The margin figures depend on stated utilization and API gross-margin assumptions, so they should not be read as audited subscription margins.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Plan Changes and Usage Patterns
The next concrete date in the report is October 29, when existing subscribers on OpenAI’s $200 plan are due to lose their grandfathered limits. SemiAnalysis also said it was still testing the new tier’s Ultrafast mode. Further comparisons will depend on whether providers change allowances again as model prices shift, and on how much subscribers use premium models under the revised plans.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
What does the report mean by API-equivalent value?
It estimates the cost of buying a plan’s full monthly token allowance at the provider’s published API list prices. It is a comparison measure, not a cash payout or a promise that each subscriber will use that amount.
Which plans did SemiAnalysis compare?
The central mid-tier comparison covers ChatGPT Plus and Claude Pro at $20, ChatGPT Pro 100 and Claude Max 5x at $100, and ChatGPT Pro 200 and Claude Max 20x at $200. The report also discusses frontier models and other AI subscriptions.
Why can a lower API price reduce subscription value?
If a plan’s token allowance does not rise when the API price falls, the same allowance costs less at API list rates. The report says this happened with recent model changes at both OpenAI and Anthropic.
Do the estimates show what most subscribers receive?
No. The headline figures price a full allowance for a specific agentic workload. Actual value depends on a subscriber’s usage, model choice and token mix.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Halloween Picks
halloween
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
