text model comparison
Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol
Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GPT-5.6 Sol are both current text models, from Anthropic and OpenAI. Claude Sonnet 5.5 is 50% cheaper per 1M input tokens than GPT-5.6 Sol, $2 vs $4. On Arena Text, Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores 1477 Elo and GPT-5.6 Sol 1485 Elo (Arena, measured October 28, 2026). GPT-5.6 Sol has the larger context window, 1,050,000 vs 1,000,000 tokens.
- Higher Arena Text
- GPT-5.6 Sol1485 Elo against 1477 Elo
- Lower price per 1M input tokens
- Claude Sonnet 5.5$2 against $4
- Longer context window
- GPT-5.6 Sol1.05M tokens against 1M tokens
- Newer release
- Claude Sonnet 5.5Sep 2026 against Jul 2026
Data verified November 3, 2026 · Dataset 2026-11-03
Side by side
Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GPT-5.6 Sol, line by line
Prices in effect today, compared at the same tier wherever both list one. The better value in each row is highlighted.
| Fact | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| Price | ||
| Price per 1M input tokens | $2 (better) | $4 |
| Price per 1M output tokens | $10 (better) | $20 |
| Independent benchmarks | ||
| Arena Text | 1477 Elo (#19 of 51) | 1485 Elo (#11 of 51) (better) |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2) | 88.8% (#8 of 42) | 89.1% (#7 of 42) (better) |
| GPQA Diamond | 95.6% (#3 of 41) (better) | 93.5% (#12 of 41) |
| SimpleQA Verified | 46.5% (#23 of 38) | 69.7% (#8 of 38) (better) |
| Arena WebDev | 1770 Elo (#3 of 45) | Not measured |
| Specs | ||
| Provider | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Release date | September 28, 2026 | July 9, 2026 |
| Access | API only | API only |
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,050,000 tokens |
| Max output | 128,000 tokens | 128,000 tokens |
| Input | text, image | text, image |
| Output | text | text |
Charts
Against every current text model
Where Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GPT-5.6 Sol land among the current models of their task, on every independent benchmark, on price and on context.
Where each stands
On Arena Text, Claude Sonnet 5.5 ranks #19 and GPT-5.6 Sol #11 of 51 current models. Each bar is the share of current models it beats: on score, price and context.
Independent benchmarks
Arena Text
Claude Sonnet 5.5:#19of 51
1,477 Elo · ahead of 62%
GPT-5.6 Sol:#11of 51
1,485 Elo · ahead of 80%
Arena WebDev
Claude Sonnet 5.5:#3of 45
1,770 Elo · ahead of 95%
GPT-5.6 Sol: Not scored
FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)
Claude Sonnet 5.5:#8of 42
88.8% · ahead of 83%
GPT-5.6 Sol:#7of 42
89.1% · ahead of 85%
GPQA Diamond
Claude Sonnet 5.5:#3of 41
95.6% · ahead of 95%
GPT-5.6 Sol:#12of 41
93.5% · ahead of 73%
SimpleQA Verified
Claude Sonnet 5.5:#23of 38
46.5% · ahead of 41%
GPT-5.6 Sol:#8of 38
69.7% · ahead of 78%
Price and context
Price per 1M input tokens
Claude Sonnet 5.5:#29of 52
$2 · cheaper than 24%
GPT-5.6 Sol:#43of 52
$4 · cheaper than 14%
Price per 1M output tokens
Claude Sonnet 5.5:#34of 52
$10 · cheaper than 25%
GPT-5.6 Sol:#43of 52
$20 · cheaper than 14%
Context window
Claude Sonnet 5.5:#26of 64
1M tokens · longer than 22%
GPT-5.6 Sol:#1of 64
1.05M tokens · longer than 86%
Quality against price
Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores 1,477 at $4; GPT-5.6 Sol scores 1,485 at $8 (blended price per 1M tokens). The line joins the current models no other beats on both price and Arena Text score; hover any point to name it.
Quality against price: the data
| Model | Provider | Blended price per 1M tokens | Arena Text (Elo) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gemini 4 Argon | $4 | 1,520 | |
| Claude Opus 5.5 | Anthropic | $8 | 1,509 |
| Muse Wonder | Meta | $8 | 1,507 |
| Claude Fable 5 | Anthropic | $20 | 1,504 |
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Anthropic | $20 | 1,504 |
| Gemini 3.8 Flash | $1.50 | 1,496 | |
| Muse Spark 1.3 | Meta | $2 | 1,495 |
| Claude Opus 5 | Anthropic | $10 | 1,492 |
| Kimi K3 | Moonshot Kimi | $6 | 1,488 |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | OpenAI | $8 | 1,485 |
| Gemini 3.6 Flash | $3 | 1,483 | |
| GPT-5.5 | OpenAI | $11 | 1,482 |
| Claude Opus 4.8 | Anthropic | $10 | 1,482 |
| Qwen3.8-Max | Alibaba Qwen | $3 | 1,482 |
| GPT-6.1 Sol | OpenAI | $4 | 1,481 |
| GLM-5.3 | Z.ai | $2.15 | 1,481 |
| MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Xiaomi MiMo | $0.54 | 1,480 |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Anthropic | $4 | 1,477 |
| GLM-5.3-Flash | Z.ai | $0.24 | 1,477 |
| GPT-6 Astra | OpenAI | $20 | 1,476 |
| DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash | DeepSeek | $0.52 | 1,476 |
| GPT-5.4 | OpenAI | $5.63 | 1,475 |
| Gemini 3 Flash Preview | $1.13 | 1,473 | |
| Grok 4.20 | xAI | $1.56 | 1,472 |
| GPT-5.6 Terra | OpenAI | $4.50 | 1,467 |
| Grok 4.5 | xAI | $3 | 1,465 |
| DeepSeek-V4-Pro | DeepSeek | $1.98 | 1,465 |
| Claude Sonnet 5 | Anthropic | $4 | 1,462 |
| GPT-6 Sol | OpenAI | $4 | 1,458 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | $0.85 | 1,456 | |
| Grok 4.6 | xAI | $3 | 1,455 |
| GPT-5.6 Luna | OpenAI | $0.45 | 1,453 |
| MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Xiaomi MiMo | $0.18 | 1,448 |
| Step 5 Preview | StepFun | $1.43 | 1,448 |
| Grok 4.3 | xAI | $1.56 | 1,442 |
| GPT-6 Luna | OpenAI | $0.20 | 1,441 |
| Grok 4.7 | xAI | $3 | 1,441 |
| Mistral Large 4 | Mistral AI | $1.05 | 1,432 |
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | Anthropic | $0.20 | 1,425 |
| GPT-4.1 | OpenAI | $3.50 | 1,415 |
| Solar Pro 4 | Upstage | $0.52 | 1,388 |
| GPT-4.1 mini | OpenAI | $0.70 | 1,383 |
| GPT-4.1 nano | OpenAI | $0.18 | 1,322 |
Cost
What each costs
Example workloads at each provider's listed rates, then every other rate either one lists. The cheaper figure in each row is highlighted.
The same work, priced
For 10M input and 2M output tokens, GPT-5.6 Sol costs 2.0 times as much as Claude Sonnet 5.5, at each provider's listed rates.
10M input and 2M output tokens
GPT-5.6 Sol costs 2.0× as much
- Claude Sonnet 5.5
- $40
- GPT-5.6 Sol
- $80
The same, with 9M of the input tokens cached
GPT-5.6 Sol costs 2.1× as much
- Claude Sonnet 5.5
- $22.90
- GPT-5.6 Sol
- $47.60
| Workload or rate | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| Example workloads | ||
| 10M input and 2M output tokens | $40 (better) | $80 |
| The same, with 9M of the input tokens cached | $22.90 (better) | $47.60 |
| The same, through the batch API | $20 | Not listed |
| Other listed rates | ||
| 1M input tokens, cached | $0.10 (better) | $0.40 |
| 1M input tokens, 5-minute cache write | $2.50 | Not listed |
| 1M input tokens, 1-hour cache write | $4 | Not listed |
| 1M input tokens, batch | $1 | Not listed |
| 1M output tokens, batch | $5 | Not listed |
Your own bill will differ. These figures use list prices and example workloads. The AI Model Cost Audit reviews your real usage, shortlists models that score as well for each task for less, and estimates the savings.
Launch price $100, regular price $150
Verdict
When to choose each
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Where it leads
- Lower input and output prices, $2 and $10 vs $4 and $20 per 1M tokens
- Higher GPQA Diamond score, 95.6% vs 93.5%
- Cheaper cached input, $0.10 vs $0.40 per 1M tokens
- Batch pricing, $1 input and $5 output per 1M tokens
Best for
- Production workloads that need frontier-adjacent quality at a mid-tier rate
- Latency-sensitive agent steps inside a larger pipeline
Watch out for
- Same list price as Claude Sonnet 5, so the gain is capability and cache economics rather than a cheaper rate card
- Anthropic positions Opus 5.5 rather than this as the default, so reach for Sonnet 5.5 when latency matters more than peak capability
GPT-5.6 Sol
Where it leads
- Higher Arena Text score, 1485 Elo vs 1477 Elo
- Higher FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2) score, 89.1% vs 88.8%
- Higher SimpleQA Verified score, 69.7% vs 46.5%
- Larger context window 1,050,000 vs 1,000,000 tokens
Best for
- Frontier capability evaluations for complex API workflows
- Long-horizon coding and research agents that use computer use or MCP tools
Watch out for
- Not in the pinned LiveBench snapshot; its independent scores here come from Epoch AI's own GPQA Diamond, FrontierMath and SimpleQA Verified runs
From benchmark to production
Building on Claude Sonnet 5.5 or GPT-5.6 Sol?
Public scores rarely hold on your own data. We test both models on your real tasks, then build the agent or pipeline around the one that wins.
AI Model Cost AuditLaunch price $100, regular price $150What the audit includes
FAQ
Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol FAQ
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or GPT-5.6 Sol?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is 50% cheaper per 1M input tokens than GPT-5.6 Sol, $2 vs $4. For 10M input and 2M output tokens, Claude Sonnet 5.5 costs $40 and GPT-5.6 Sol $80 at standard rates.
Which is cheaper with prompt caching, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or GPT-5.6 Sol?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 charges $0.10 per 1M cached input tokens, 95% below its standard input rate, and GPT-5.6 Sol $0.40, 90% below. With 9M of 10M input tokens cached and 2M output tokens, Claude Sonnet 5.5 costs $22.90 and GPT-5.6 Sol $47.60.
Which scores higher on independent benchmarks, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or GPT-5.6 Sol?
GPT-5.6 Sol leads on Arena Text, 1485 Elo to 1477 Elo; GPT-5.6 Sol leads on FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2), 89.1% to 88.8%; Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads on GPQA Diamond, 95.6% to 93.5%. Scores are independent evaluations, not either vendor's launch figures.
Which has the larger context window, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or GPT-5.6 Sol?
GPT-5.6 Sol has the larger context window, 1,050,000 vs 1,000,000 tokens. Both return up to 128,000 tokens per response.
Further reading
More on Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GPT-5.6 Sol
Articles on Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GPT-5.6 Sol
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6 Luna: Cost, Speed and AccuracySeptember 29, 2026
- Claude Sonnet 5.5: Benchmarks, Price and When to Use OpusSeptember 29, 2026
- Claude Opus 5.5 Benchmarks: What the Chart Shows and HidesSeptember 23, 2026
- Fable 5.1 vs Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6: Which to UseSeptember 1, 2026
- Token Efficiency: OpenAI's Full-Stack BetAugust 25, 2026
- Kimi K3 vs Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol: which model should you use?July 31, 2026
Related comparisons
- Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5
- GPT-5.6 Sol vs GPT-6.1 Sol
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Mistral Large 4
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Gemini 4 Argon
- GPT-5.6 Sol vs GPT-6 Luna
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol
- GPT-5.6 Sol vs GPT-6 Sol
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs GPT-5.6 Sol
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5
- GPT-5.6 Sol vs GPT-6 Astra
Production evaluation
Choosing between Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GPT-5.6 Sol?
Public benchmarks narrow the shortlist. We run both on your own tasks, data and cost limits, then build the routing and review controls to run the winner in production.
- A head-to-head evaluation on your real workload
- Routing between models by cost and difficulty
