pvakati-tech.ai

// head_to_head

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol

Published LiveBench scores across all seven categories, live list pricing, context windows, and the measured cost of a point of capability — for both models, side by side.

OpenRouter + LiveBenchAll comparisonsFull leaderboard

Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GPT-6.1 Sol are priced within ~10% of each other.

GPT-6.1 Sol does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

anthropic

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Blended / 1M
$4.00
Context
1M
Released
Sep 28, 2026
Overall score
77.8
reasoningtool callingimage inputfile inputprompt caching

openai

GPT-6.1 Sol

Blended / 1M
$4.00
Context
1.1M
Released
Sep 29, 2026
Overall score
Not evaluated
reasoningtool callingfile inputimage inputprompt caching

Specs and pricing

MetricClaude Sonnet 5.5GPT-6.1 Sol
LiveBench overall

Mean of the seven LiveBench category scores, 0–100. Higher is better.

77.8—
Cost per point

Measured benchmark spend divided by overall score — dollars per point of capability.

$0.0742—
Blended price / 1M

3:1 input:output mix, the usual shape of production traffic.

$4.00$4.00
Input price / 1M$2.00$2.00
Output price / 1M$10.00$10.00
Cached input / 1M

Price of an input token served from the prompt cache, where the provider publishes one.

$0.200$0.100win
Context window1M1.1M
Max output tokens128K128K

Benchmarks by category

An overall score averages away the thing you probably care about. These are the seven LiveBench categories scored separately — Claude Sonnet 5.5 on top, GPT-6.1 Sol below, both out of 100.

Agentic coding
39.3
—
Coding
88.9
—
Reasoning
86.8
—
Mathematics
96.7
—
Data analysis
78.6
—
Language
83.4
—
Instruction following
70.5
—

What each one costs to run

Per-token prices are hard to feel. These are monthly list costs for both models across five workload shapes, using each provider's published cached-input rate where there is one.

WorkloadClaude Sonnet 5.5GPT-6.1 Sol
Support chatbot

1.2K in / 400 out × 200K requests

$1,150/mo$1,143/mo
RAG assistant

8K in / 600 out × 100K requests

$1,480/mo$1,440/mo
Coding agent

40K in / 4K out × 20K requests

$1,392/mo$1,336/mo
Document extraction

20K in / 1.5K out × 50K requests

$2,660/mo$2,655/mo
Bulk classification

500 in / 20 out × 5M requests

$5,100/mo$5,050/mo
Run these two through the cost calculator

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol FAQ

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or GPT-6.1 Sol?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GPT-6.1 Sol are priced within ~10% of each other. GPT-6.1 Sol does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 cheaper than GPT-6.1 Sol?

They cost about the same. Both land near $4.00 per million tokens on a 3:1 input:output blend, so price is unlikely to be the deciding factor between them.

Does Claude Sonnet 5.5 or GPT-6.1 Sol have a bigger context window?

They are effectively the same — 1M for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and 1.1M for GPT-6.1 Sol.

Do Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GPT-6.1 Sol support prompt caching?

Both publish a cached-input rate: $0.200 per million for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and $0.100 for GPT-6.1 Sol, against full input rates of $2.00 and $2.00. On a workload with a long stable prefix — a system prompt, a tool schema, a retrieved corpus — that changes the economics more than the headline price does.

Related comparisons

How these numbers are produced

  • Price — provider list price from OpenRouter, refreshed every 15 minutes. “Blended” is a 3:1 input:output mix.
  • Scores — LiveBench release 2026-06-25, using their own category map. Each model shows its strongest published run. A blank means “not evaluated”, never “bad”.
  • Cost per point — the measured dollars LiveBench spent on the run, divided by the score it earned.
  • “Win” — awarded only past a threshold: one full point on a benchmark score, 10% on a price, 25% on a context window. Anything tighter reports as a tie, because effort settings alone move a LiveBench score by more than that.

Published benchmarks rank models on someone else's tasks. Before committing, see LLM & agent evaluation for building an eval on your own.