Which model is better: Claude Opus 5.5 or GPT-6.1 Sol?
GPT-6.1 Sol is 50.0% cheaper for input tokens ($2.00 vs. $4.00 per 1M tokens) and $10.00 vs. $20.00 for output tokens (2.0x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, GPT-6.1 Sol delivers lower response latency at 520ms TTFT (160ms faster than Claude Opus 5.5) with 135 vs. 95 tok/s throughput. Claude Opus 5.5 leads coding evaluations at 89.9% SWE-bench Verified vs. 86.4% for GPT-6.1 Sol and 93.2% vs. 92.4% on GPQA Diamond.
Verified daily via automated API latency tests and official documentation.
Zero-Shot RAG Verified
Verified Performance & Unit Economics Delta (12 Dimensions)
Daily synchronized metrics across token pricing, prompt cache economics, latency, throughput, and 5 capability benchmarks.
Metric / Dimension
Claude Opus 5.5
GPT-6.1 Sol
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$4.00
$2.00
GPT-6.1 Sol is 2.0x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$20.00
$10.00
GPT-6.1 Sol (50.0% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$0.200
$0.100
GPT-6.1 Sol is 2.0x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$5.00
$2.00
GPT-6.1 Sol is 2.5x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
1,024k (128k out)
1,075k (128k out)
GPT-6.1 Sol (1.1x larger context)
Avg TTFT Response Latency
680ms
520ms
GPT-6.1 Sol (160ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
95 tok/s
135 tok/s
GPT-6.1 Sol (+40 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
89.9%
86.4%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+3.5% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
93.2%
92.4%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+0.8% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
92.1%
91%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+1.1% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
98%
98.8%
GPT-6.1 Sol (+0.8% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
57.8 / 100
62.9 / 100
GPT-6.1 Sol (+5.1 pts)
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.
Choose Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) for top-ranked frontier intelligence leader for autonomous multi-step agentic coding, repository-scale migrations, and complex scientific reasoning at a 40% lower workload cost than Opus 5 — offering a 1,024k context window, 680ms TTFT, and $4.00/1M input pricing ($0.200/1M cached reads).
Choose GPT-6.1 Sol (OpenAI) for delivers near-GPT-6 Astra frontier accuracy at one-fifth the token cost with a 95% cache read discount for high-efficiency agentic coding, computer use, and enterprise workflow automation — offering a 1,075k context window, 520ms TTFT, and $2.00/1M input pricing ($0.100/1M cached reads).
GPT-6.1 Sol is cheaper at $2.00/1M input tokens ($10.00/1M output) compared to $4.00/1M input ($20.00/1M output) for Claude Opus 5.5.
Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: Claude Opus 5.5 or GPT-6.1 Sol?
GPT-6.1 Sol delivers faster first-token latency at 520ms TTFT (135 tok/s throughput) compared to 680ms TTFT (95 tok/s) for Claude Opus 5.5.
How do Claude Opus 5.5 and GPT-6.1 Sol compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude Opus 5.5 scores 89.9% versus 86.4% for GPT-6.1 Sol. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude Opus 5.5 scores 93.2% versus 92.4% for GPT-6.1 Sol (and 98% vs 98.8% on MATH-500).
When should you choose Claude Opus 5.5?
Choose Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) for top-ranked frontier intelligence leader for autonomous multi-step agentic coding, repository-scale migrations, and complex scientific reasoning at a 40% lower workload cost than Opus 5 — offering a 1,024k context window, 680ms TTFT, and $4.00/1M input pricing ($0.200/1M cached reads).
When should you choose GPT-6.1 Sol?
Choose GPT-6.1 Sol (OpenAI) for delivers near-GPT-6 Astra frontier accuracy at one-fifth the token cost with a 95% cache read discount for high-efficiency agentic coding, computer use, and enterprise workflow automation — offering a 1,075k context window, 520ms TTFT, and $2.00/1M input pricing ($0.100/1M cached reads).
