Claude Haiku 5.5 vs GPT-6 Sol
Which one, when
gpt-6-sol costs $2 input and $10 output with $0.2 cache reads; claude-haiku-5-5 costs $0.1 and $0.5 with $0.01 cache reads, 20x less on every rate. Both take text and image, allow 128000 output tokens, let you switch thinking off, and offer about a million tokens of context (1050000 and 1000000). Both also charge more for long prompts: claude-haiku-5-5 bills at 5x above 100000 tokens, and gpt-6-sol raises its rates above 272000. Pick claude-haiku-5-5 when cost per request decides, and gpt-6-sol when you want OpenAI's balanced tier.
Benchmarks
Claude Haiku 5.5: the vendor has not published benchmark scores.
Vendor-published: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic DeepSeek Google OpenAI Z.ai
Pricing
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | GPT-6 Sol | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M tokens | $0.1 | $2 | 0.05× |
| Output / 1M tokens | $0.5 | $10 | 0.05× |
| Cache read / 1M tokens | $0.01 | $0.2 | 0.05× |
| Cache write | 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) | no separate charge | - |
Rates from the live catalogue at build time; each model page carries the current rate card.
Where they sit · input price per 1M tokens across all 78 chat models on this billing unit (log scale)
Capabilities
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | GPT-6 Sol | |
|---|---|---|
| Tool calling | yes | yes |
| Thinking control | configurable | configurable |
| Structured output | yes | yes |
| Prompt caching | explicit (you mark the prefix) | implicit (automatic) |
| Cache lifetime | 5m default, 1h option | 5-10m, up to 1h |
| Minimum cached prefix | 1024 tokens | 1024 tokens |
Specs
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | GPT-6 Sol | |
|---|---|---|
| Input modalities | text image | text image |
| Output modalities | text | text |
| Released | 2026-10-07 | 2026-09-22 |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2026-06 | 2026-04 |
| Context window | 1M | 1.1M |
| Max output | 128K | 128K |
| Thinking parameter | output_config.effort | reasoning.effort |
| Accepted values | output_config.effort
| reasoning.effort
|
| Default | medium | medium |
Specs are transcribed from each vendor’s documentation; a row a vendor does not publish is left out rather than inferred. Full sources: Claude Haiku 5.5 · GPT-6 Sol
One prompt, both models, measured through the gateway
Claude Haiku 5.5 passed · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning makes the model generate a long internal chain of thought before its answer, and those thinking tokens are billed as output tokens, which cost several times more than input tokens. The model often produces many times more output per request than it did without reasoning, so the per-call cost rises even when the visible answer looks about the same length. Because that extra spend scales with every request, the bill roughly doubled, and we can control it by setting reasoning budgets, using reasoning only for tasks that need it, or routing simpler requests to a non-reasoning model.
out 332 tok (+159 thinking) latency 2.9 s
GPT-6 Sol passed · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning made the model generate extra internal tokens to work through each request, and those tokens are billed even though users don’t see them. If request volume stayed roughly the same, more billed tokens per request could explain why the bill doubled. We should check the usage breakdown to confirm, then lower reasoning effort or limit it to tasks that need it.
out 188 tok (+111 thinking) latency 5.0 s
Instruction following (exactly three sentences, so countable), audience shaping (CFO register), and the hidden-thinking billing gap the token meters below expose.
Claude Haiku 5.5 passed · 8/8 cases
```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The bug is that `cur` counts adjacent equal *pairs*, not run *elements*. A run of k equal items produces k−1 matching pairs, so the function returns one less than the true length, and a single-element input produces no pairs at all, so it returns 0 instead of 1. Resetting `cur` to 0 on a mismatch compounds this by starting every run one step behind. The fix starts both `cur` and `best` at 1 (a non-empty list always has a run of at least one element), resets `cur` to 1 on a mismatch, and updates `best` after every element rather than only inside the equal-branch. The empty-list guard keeps the function from returning 1 for `[]`. […]
out 1012 tok (+591 thinking) latency 6.0 s
GPT-6 Sol passed · 8/8 cases
```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The original `cur` counted matching *adjacent pairs*, not items, so every run was one too short—including a single-element input, which returned 0. Starting each run at 1 counts its first item, and updating `best` on every iteration ensures a run that reaches the last index is included.
out 206 tok (+59 thinking) latency 5.9 s
Whether the fix is actually correct (runnable), explanation density, and token efficiency on a bounded task.
Claude Haiku 5.5 passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "Formal guidance withheld pending the Q4 "
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": null, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "Formal guidance withheld pending the Q4 close" } ``` Notes: The text gives revenue as 412 but doesn't state the currency, so I left `revenue_usd_m` as null. Growth is "eleven and change," so 11 is an approximation.
out 725 tok (+572 thinking) latency 4.6 s
GPT-6 Sol passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending the Q4 close"
{"company":"Meridian Robotics","quarter":"September quarter","revenue_usd_m":null,"growth_pct":null,"guidance":"Withheld pending the Q4 close"}
out 227 tok (+185 thinking) latency 5.2 s
Schema obedience (no invented fields), hallucination pressure (guidance is explicitly withheld), and structured-output path differences.
Claude Haiku 5.5 passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
**Introducing Prompt Cache Sync, the newest feature in GatewayOne.** Teams routing requests across OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google have often paid to process the same long system prompts again and again. Now the gateway stores those prompts once and reuses them wherever they appear, regardless of provider. Repeated context is matched by content hash, so cached prefixes return faster and cost less, with no changes to your application code. How much could this save your team? Enable Prompt Cache Sync from the dashboard, and your next billing report will show the difference. Cache entries follow your existing retention settings and can be purged per project at any time. Availability begins this week for all Scale and Enterprise plans worldwide. Start today.
out 2164 tok (+1929 thinking) latency 9.9 s
GPT-6 Sol passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Today, we’re introducing cross-provider prompt caching for our API gateway, helping teams reuse repeated prompt content when routing requests among supported AI providers. The gateway identifies eligible prompt prefixes, stores cache references, and applies them to subsequent requests where provider capabilities allow. Why send the same context again if it can be reused? With fewer duplicate input tokens, applications can reduce costs and improve latency without changing how developers call the gateway. Configure caching by route, monitor hit rates and savings in your dashboard, and keep existing provider fallback rules in place. Availability and cache behavior vary by provider, so the gateway reports eligibility and usage for each request. Get started today with our documentation and test your existing workloads.
out 586 tok (+443 thinking) latency 7.7 s
Constraint obedience (word budget, banned-word list, the single question), style fingerprint, and length control.
Switch between them with one line
Both ids are in every tab below; the highlighted pair of lines is the only edit. Same endpoint, same key, same request shape.
from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI(
base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
api_key="sk-syn-...",
)
resp = client.chat.completions.create(
model="claude-haiku-5-5",
# model="gpt-6-sol", # uncomment this line, comment the one above
messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)import OpenAI from "openai";
const client = new OpenAI({
baseURL: "https://synthorai.io/v1",
apiKey: "sk-syn-...",
});
const resp = await client.chat.completions.create({
model: "claude-haiku-5-5",
// model: "gpt-6-sol", // uncomment this line, comment the one above
messages: [{ role: "user", content: "Summarize this diff" }],
reasoning_effort: "medium",
});
console.log(resp.choices[0].message.content);curl https://synthorai.io/v1/chat/completions \
-H "Authorization: Bearer sk-syn-..." \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"model": "claude-haiku-5-5",
# "model": "gpt-6-sol", # uncomment this line, comment the one above
"messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}],
"reasoning_effort": "medium"
}'package main
import (
"context"
"fmt"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3/option"
)
func main() {
client := openai.NewClient(
option.WithBaseURL("https://synthorai.io/v1"),
option.WithAPIKey("sk-syn-..."),
)
resp, _ := client.Chat.Completions.New(context.TODO(), openai.ChatCompletionNewParams{
Model: "claude-haiku-5-5",
// Model: "gpt-6-sol", // uncomment this line, comment the one above
Messages: []openai.ChatCompletionMessageParamUnion{
openai.UserMessage("Summarize this diff"),
},
ReasoningEffort: openai.ReasoningEffortMedium,
})
fmt.Println(resp.Choices[0].Message.Content)
}import com.openai.client.OpenAIClient;
import com.openai.client.okhttp.OpenAIOkHttpClient;
import com.openai.models.chat.completions.*;
import com.openai.models.ReasoningEffort;
OpenAIClient client = OpenAIOkHttpClient.builder()
.baseUrl("https://synthorai.io/v1")
.apiKey("sk-syn-...")
.build();
ChatCompletion resp = client.chat().completions().create(
ChatCompletionCreateParams.builder()
.model("claude-haiku-5-5")
// .model("gpt-6-sol") // uncomment this line, comment the one above
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));FAQ
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 or GPT-6 Sol?
Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper on the "Input / 1M tokens" row ($0.1 vs $2, 20× apart). Other rows may point the other way; the table above carries the full rate card, and real cost depends on your mix.
Can I A/B test Claude Haiku 5.5 against GPT-6 Sol without two integrations?
Yes. Both are served through the same OpenAI-compatible endpoint with one API key. Switching is a one-line change to the model id, so you can route a fraction of traffic to each and compare bills directly.
Do Claude Haiku 5.5 and GPT-6 Sol support prompt caching?
Yes. Both bill cache reads below their input rate, so warm-prefix workloads cost less than the list rates suggest. The exact cache-read rows are in the pricing table above.