Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Ring-2.6-1T

Claude Opus 5.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#3); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.6

Rank #3 Confirmed

Ring-2.6-1T Ant Group (inclusionAI)

36.9

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 2 categories and Ring-2.6-1T in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 80.2 to 26.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is CritPt: 31.7% for Claude Opus 5.5 and 3.7% for Ring-2.6-1T.
  • Ring-2.6-1T has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Ring-2.6-1T
ProviderAnthropicAnt Group (inclusionAI)
Noometry Index68.636.9
Released2026-09-222026-05-14
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$4—
Output $ / M tokens$20—
Results tracked443

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), Ring-2.6-1T: 40.7

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Ring-2.6-1T
SciCode66.9%42.4%
ALE-Bench2,147432.57
FrontierCode54.6%—
CursorBench57.8%—
LMArena WebDev1813—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
LMArena Coding1547—
MirrorCode77.4%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Ring-2.6-1T
APEX-Agents73.5%—
GDP.pdf30.6%—
Vending-Bench 29,235—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), Ring-2.6-1T: 26.1

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Ring-2.6-1T
CritPt31.7%3.7%
ARC-AGI-293.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%—
ARC-AGI-198.5%—
EBR-Bench71.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1535—
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—
DTBench98.9%—
LMCA68.2%—
Epoch Capabilities Index167.33—

Math Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Ring-2.6-1T
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
LMArena Math1506—
FrontierMath Erdős2.9%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Ring-2.6-1T
GPQA Diamond90.6%—
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—
LMArena Expert1547—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Vision1321—
Blueprint-Bench 251.2%—
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Non-English1507—
LMArena Chinese1588—
LMArena French1514—
LMArena Russian1520—
LMArena Spanish1507—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Instruction Following1537—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Longer Query1532—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), Ring-2.6-1T: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Text1515—
LMArena Creative Writing1533—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—
LMArena Multi-Turn1499—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Ring-2.6-1T?

Claude Opus 5.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#3); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Ring-2.6-1T better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.9 versus 40.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Ring-2.6-1T share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Ring-2.6-1T has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper