Model comparison
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol
Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 65.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 44 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 44 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 9 categories and GPT-5.6 Sol in 1 category; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multimodal, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 57.8 to 48.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MirrorCode: 77.4% for Claude Opus 5.5 and 20% for GPT-5.6 Sol.
- Both cost about the same: $4 input and $20 output per million tokens.
- GPT-5.6 Sol accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-5.6 Sol | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 68.6 | 65.0 |
| Released | 2026-09-22 | 2026-07-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $4 | $4 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $20 | $20 |
| Results tracked | 44 | 65 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 71.9 (#3), GPT-5.6 Sol: 65.1 (#7)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierCode | 54.6% | 47.5% |
| CursorBench | 57.8% | 41.7% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1813 | 1618 |
| FrontierSWE | 62.3% | 32.2% |
| SciCode | 66.9% | 57.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1547 | 1498 |
| MirrorCode | 77.4% | 20% |
| ALE-Bench | 2,147 | 2,177 |
| DeepSWE | — | 72.7% |
| GSO | — | 76.5% |
| WeirdML | — | 89.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.6 Sol leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15), GPT-5.6 Sol: 50.3 (#7)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 73.5% | 51.4% |
| GDP.pdf | 30.6% | 30.7% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 9,235 | 9,619 |
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 27.3% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 46.9% |
| PostTrainBench | — | 36.2% |
| BALROG | — | 60% |
| GBAEval | — | 52.6% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1257 |
Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), GPT-5.6 Sol: 74.8 (#8)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 93.3% | 92.5% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 88.5% | 93.8% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98.5% | 97.5% |
| CritPt | 31.7% | 32.3% |
| EBR-Bench | 71.4% | 44.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1535 | 1484 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 71% | 58% |
| DTBench | 98.9% | 96% |
| LMCA | 68.2% | 59.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 167.33 | 161.66 |
| SimpleBench | — | 71.7% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 67% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 64% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 37.1% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 93.1% |
| Bench to the Future 3 | — | 0.14 |
Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3), GPT-5.6 Sol: 85.6 (#9)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 91.2% | 89.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 95% | 82.9% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | 100% |
| ProofBench | 100% | 83% |
| LMArena Math | 1506 | 1474 |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 2.9% | 0% |
Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10), GPT-5.6 Sol: 64.3 (#18)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.6% | 93.5% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 72.2% | 69.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1547 | 1516 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 12.4% |
Multimodal Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), GPT-5.6 Sol: 48.6 (#9)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1321 | 1281 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 51.2% | 33.6% |
| Furniture Assembly | 83.3% | 56.7% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1483 |
Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), GPT-5.6 Sol: 55.3 (#32)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1507 | 1452 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1588 | 1527 |
| LMArena French | 1514 | 1477 |
| LMArena Russian | 1520 | 1468 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1507 | 1441 |
| LMArena German | — | 1476 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1471 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1442 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), GPT-5.6 Sol: 77.7 (#16)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1537 | 1482 |
Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), GPT-5.6 Sol: 45.4 (#42)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1532 | 1480 |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads
Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), GPT-5.6 Sol: 73.3 (#12)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1515 | 1457 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1533 | 1448 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2050 | 1972 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1499 | 1460 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1250 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than GPT-5.6 Sol?
Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 65.0 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or GPT-5.6 Sol?
GPT-5.6 Sol is cheaper. It lists at $4 per million input tokens and $20 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5.5 lists at $4 and $20.
Is Claude Opus 5.5 or GPT-5.6 Sol better for coding?
Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.9 versus 65.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.6 Sol does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and GPT-5.6 Sol share?
44 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.6 Sol has 65.