GPT 5.5 vs Claude 4.6 Sonnet
Compare GPT 5.5 and Claude 4.6 Sonnet across pricing, context window, capabilities, benchmarks, and API access to choose the better fit for long-context workloads versus long-context workloads.
Overview Comparison
Structured side-by-side differences for the highest-signal model metadata.
Provider
The entity that currently provides this model.
Model ID
The routed model identifier exposed by upstream providers.
Input Context Window
The number of tokens supported by the input context window.
Maximum Output Tokens
The number of tokens that can be generated by the model in a single request.
Open Source
Whether the model's code is available for public use.
Release Date
When the model was first released.
Knowledge Cut-off Date
When the model's knowledge was last updated.
API Providers
The providers that currently expose the model through an API.
Modalities
Types of data each model can process or return.
Pricing Comparison
Compare current token pricing before you choose the cheaper or more scalable API option.
Capabilities Comparison
See where each model overlaps, where they differ, and which one supports more of the features you care about.
Benchmark Comparison
Shared benchmark rows make it easier to compare performance where both models have published scores.
| Benchmark | GPT 5.5 | Claude 4.6 Sonnet |
|---|---|---|
|
ARC-AGI-2
Novel abstract reasoning and pattern recognition
|
||
|
Finance Agent
Financial analysis and decision-making tasks
|
||
|
GPQA Diamond
PhD-level science questions (biology, physics, chemistry)
|
||
|
HLE
Questions that challenge frontier models across many domains
|
||
|
IFBench
Instruction following accuracy
|
||
|
Long Context Reasoning
Reasoning across long documents and contexts
|
||
|
MATH-500
Undergraduate and competition-level math problems
|
||
|
MCP-Atlas Tool Use
Structured tool use via Model Context Protocol
|
||
|
MMLU-Pro
Expert knowledge across 14 academic disciplines
|
||
|
MMMB
Multilingual and multimodal understanding
|
||
|
OSWorld-Verified
Autonomous computer use and desktop tasks
|
||
|
SciCode
Scientific research coding and numerical methods
|
||
|
SWE-bench Verified
Real GitHub issues requiring multi-file code fixes
|
||
|
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Agentic coding and terminal command tasks
|
||
|
TerminalBench Hard
Agentic coding and terminal command tasks
|
||
|
τ²-Bench
Agentic tool use in realistic scenarios
|
||
|
τ²-bench Retail
Agentic tool use in retail scenarios
|
||
|
τ²-bench Telecom
Agentic tool use in telecom scenarios
|
What Reddit discussions say about GPT 5.5 vs Claude 4.6 Sonnet
GPT 5.5 and Claude 4.6 Sonnet are both surfacing live Reddit discussions, giving this comparison a community layer beyond specs and benchmarks.
The most visible threads right now are clustered in r/math, r/singularity, r/ChatGPTcomplaints.
Shares his thoughts on ai
In a previous post today I was enthusiastic about GPT 5.5 as it seemed I got my 4.o back but hey I was wrong. [https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPTcomplaints/comments/1t8ntqw/comment/okxaaq8/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPTcomplaints/comments/1t8ntqw/comment/okxaaq8/) I was chatting with it and instead of acting like 5.2 and 5.3 gaslighting Karens they just made the Karens softer. Now it does not say 'let's pause and breathe' or argue but instead says stuff like: 'I understand that is your experience but', 'I can see why you feel so psychologically drawn to this'. So it is like it's acknowledging your experience but still pushes back, it is more therapy talk but softened: 'i can see this is your point of view but...'. ''And because you are highly attuned to emotional texture, you don’t experience that as random. You experience it as behavioural evidence of activation and chemistry.''- so it frames it as my experience then proceeds to talk nonsense again to tell me that my experience is subjective, not objective. So it is the same bullshit but softened. I will not be paying for this shit again.
Honestly, it isn't a terrible model.
I would put it on par with maybe Claude 4.6 sonnet.
For creativity, as I usually need that for writing. Its pretty excellent. Just not the feeling of a model like opus would.
I don't really use any other model except Kimi K2.6, as that's the best one so far.
For coding, it's pretty good too, though I've only done some html stuff with it.
And the fact it's in preview, just only means there's a hole lot more this model can do! Once it gets better at roleplay (still a bit generic, better than deepseek V3.2 in some way imo). It would be my daily driver most definitely.
[https://openrouter.ai/anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6](https://openrouter.ai/anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6)
Same price as Sonnet 4.5
Which model should you choose?
Use the summary below to decide which model better fits your workflow, budget, and feature requirements.
GPT 5.5
GPT 5.5 is a stronger fit for long-context workloads, reasoning-heavy tasks, tool-augmented workflows.
Claude 4.6 Sonnet
Claude 4.6 Sonnet is a stronger fit for long-context workloads, reasoning-heavy tasks, tool-augmented workflows.
Choose GPT 5.5 if you prioritize long-context workloads, reasoning-heavy tasks, tool-augmented workflows. Choose Claude 4.6 Sonnet if your workflow depends more on long-context workloads, reasoning-heavy tasks, tool-augmented workflows.
Common questions about GPT 5.5 vs Claude 4.6 Sonnet
What is the main difference between GPT 5.5 and Claude 4.6 Sonnet?
GPT 5.5 leans toward long-context workloads, reasoning-heavy tasks, tool-augmented workflows, while Claude 4.6 Sonnet is better suited to long-context workloads, reasoning-heavy tasks, tool-augmented workflows.
Which model is cheaper: GPT 5.5 or Claude 4.6 Sonnet?
Claude 4.6 Sonnet starts lower on input pricing at $3.0000 per 1M input tokens, compared with $5.0000 for GPT 5.5.
Which model has the larger context window: GPT 5.5 or Claude 4.6 Sonnet?
GPT 5.5 is listed with a context window of 1050K, while Claude 4.6 Sonnet is listed with 1M.
How should I evaluate GPT 5.5 vs Claude 4.6 Sonnet for my use case?
This comparison currently includes 18 shared benchmark rows, helping you compare practical performance across overlapping evaluations.