Claude Opus 5 vs Claude Opus 5.5
Quale scegliere e quando
Questi due modelli Anthropic coincidono sui fattori che di solito determinano la scelta: entrambi accettano testo e immagini in input, emettono testo, offrono un contesto di 1000000 di token con un output massimo di 128000, ed elencano le stesse capacità di chat, codice, thinking, tool e ragionamento. claude-opus-5-5 è il più recente (rilasciato il 2026-09-22, cutoff 2026-06) e il più economico a $4 in input e $20 in output contro $5 e $25, con letture dalla cache a $0.2 contro $0.5, 2.5 volte in meno. Scegli claude-opus-5 solo se hai bisogno di disattivare il thinking, poiché lo permette e claude-opus-5-5 no; altrimenti prendi il 5.5.
Benchmark
9 misurati su entrambi.
Dati pubblicati dai fornitori: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai
Prezzi
| Claude Opus 5 | Claude Opus 5.5 | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M token | $5 | $4 | 1.3× |
| Output / 1M token | $25 | $20 | 1.3× |
| Lettura cache / 1M token | $0.5 | $0.2 | 2.5× |
| Scrittura in cache | 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) | 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) | - |
Le tariffe provengono dal catalogo live al momento della build; la pagina di ciascun modello riporta la scheda attuale.
Dove si posizionano - prezzo di input per 1M di token rispetto a tutti gli 76 modelli chat con questa unità di fatturazione (scala logaritmica)
Capacità
| Claude Opus 5 | Claude Opus 5.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Utilizzo dei tool | sì | sì |
| Controllo del ragionamento | configurabile | sempre attivo |
| Output strutturato | sì | sì |
| Prompt caching | esplicito (contrassegni il prefisso) | esplicito (contrassegni il prefisso) |
| Durata della cache | 5m default, 1h option | 5m default, 1h option |
| Prefisso minimo in cache | 1024 token | 1024 token |
Specifiche
| Claude Opus 5 | Claude Opus 5.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Modalità di input | testo immagine | testo immagine |
| Modalità di output | testo | testo |
| Rilascio | 2026-07-24 | 2026-09-22 |
| Cutoff di conoscenza | 2026-05 | 2026-06 |
| Finestra di contesto | 1M | 1M |
| Output massimo | 128K | 128K |
| Parametro thinking |
| output_config.effort |
| Valori accettati | thinking.type
effort
| output_config.effort
|
| Predefinito | thinking on effort
| medium |
Le specifiche sono trascritte dalla documentazione di ciascun fornitore; una riga che un fornitore non pubblica viene omessa anziché essere dedotta. Fonti complete: Claude Opus 5 · Claude Opus 5.5
Un solo prompt, entrambi i modelli - misurati attraverso il gateway
Claude Opus 5 superato · 3 sentences
When reasoning is enabled, the model generates a hidden chain of "thinking" tokens before it writes the visible answer, and those internal tokens are billed at the output rate even though no one ever sees them — commonly 3–10x more tokens than the response itself. Because output tokens are priced several times higher than input tokens, that added volume hits us at our most expensive rate, which is why the bill roughly doubled while our request count stayed flat. The spend is controllable: we can cap the reasoning budget per call, route only genuinely hard requests to reasoning mode and cheaper models for the rest, and track cost per successfully completed task rather than cost per token, since a single correct answer usually beats three cheap retries plus human cleanup.
out 529 tok latenza 9.0 s
Claude Opus 5.5 superato · 3 sentences
When we turned on reasoning, the model began "thinking out loud" before each answer, generating thousands of internal working tokens that users never see but that we are billed for just like the final response. Those hidden tokens are charged at the output rate, typically the most expensive rate, so the same question with the same visible answer now costs roughly twice as much or more. We can bring the bill back down without losing the quality gains by capping the reasoning budget and reserving reasoning mode for the complex tasks that actually benefit from it.
out 263 tok (+102 ragionamento) latenza 5.7 s
Rispetto dell'istruzione (esattamente tre frasi - contabili), adattamento al pubblico (registro da CFO), e il divario di fatturazione del pensiero nascosto che i contatori di token qui sotto rivelano.
Claude Opus 5 superato · 8/8 cases
## Fixed version ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 if cur > best: best = cur return best ``` ## The bug The counters were tracking the wrong quantity: `cur` counted *matching adjacent pairs* rather than *elements in the current run*, and both counters started at `0` instead of `1`. Since a run of length *n* contains only *n − 1* adjacent equal pairs, every result came back one too small — `[1, 1]` returned 1, `[3, 3, 3]` returned 2 — and a single-element list returned 0 because the loop body never executed and `best` kept its initial value of `0`. […]
out 1094 tok latenza 16.1 s
Claude Opus 5.5 superato · 8/8 cases
```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` **Explanation:** The original code counted *matching adjacent pairs* rather than *items in a run*. Both `cur` and `best` started at 0, and `cur` reset to 0 on a mismatch, so a run of length *n* was reported as *n − 1*. For a single-element list the loop never executes, so it returned 0 instead of 1. For `[5, 5]` it returned 1 instead of 2. The fix treats every element as the start of a run of length 1: `best` and `cur` start at 1, and `cur` resets to 1 (not 0) when the value changes. An explicit check returns 0 for an empty list. The "misses runs at the last index" reports are the same off-by-one bug rather than a separate one. […]
out 723 tok (+303 ragionamento) latenza 10.4 s
Se la correzione è davvero giusta (eseguibile), la densità della spiegazione, e l'efficienza in token su un compito delimitato.
Claude Opus 5 superato · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending Q4 close"
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "Withheld pending Q4 close" } ``` Notes on judgment calls: - **quarter**: "September quarter" is labeled Q3 because the text refers to an upcoming "Q4 close," implying a calendar-aligned fiscal year. No fiscal year is given. - **revenue_usd_m**: 412 is stated as constant-currency and hedged ("call it"), so it's approximate; the currency is not explicitly stated as USD. - **growth_pct**: "up eleven and change" means slightly more than 11, so 11 is a floor rather than an exact figure.
out 539 tok latenza 7.6 s
Claude Opus 5.5 superato · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending Q4 close"
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "Withheld pending Q4 close" } ``` **Judgment calls to check:** - **quarter**: Kept as "September quarter" rather than "Q3", since the fiscal calendar isn't stated. The text mentions an upcoming "Q4 close," so it may be fiscal Q3, but that's not certain. - **revenue_usd_m**: The text says only "412 for the topline." It doesn't state currency or units, and the figure is on a constant-currency basis, not reported USD. USD millions is an assumption. Use `null` if you need strictly stated values. - **growth_pct**: The source says "eleven and change," so the true figure is slightly above 11. 11 is an approximation. - **guidance**: Guidance was explicitly withheld. I recorded that rather than `null`, since the text addresses it directly.
out 829 tok (+488 ragionamento) latenza 10.9 s
Aderenza allo schema (nessun campo inventato), pressione di allucinazione (guidance è esplicitamente sospesa), e differenze nel percorso di output strutturato.
Claude Opus 5 superato · 123 words, 0 banned, 1 question
**Cross-Provider Prompt Caching** We're introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching in the API Gateway. Repeated system prompts, long documents, and few-shot examples are stored once at the gateway layer and reused across OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and self-hosted models. Instead of paying full input token costs on every request, your application sends a cache reference, and the gateway rehydrates the context before forwarding it downstream. Why does that matter? Teams running high-volume agents and retrieval pipelines typically see input token spend fall 40 to 70 percent, with median latency dropping by several hundred milliseconds. Caches are scoped per project, encrypted at rest, and invalidated automatically when a prompt template changes. Enable it with a single header, and see the docs for TTL tuning and per-route controls.
out 1593 tok latenza 19.1 s
Claude Opus 5.5 superato · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Today we're launching Cross-Provider Prompt Caching for our API gateway. Why pay twice for the same context? Our gateway now stores repeated prompt prefixes, system instructions, and document chunks, then reuses them whether your request goes to OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, or an open-source model. Teams running retrieval pipelines or long agent loops can cut token costs by up to 60 percent and trim latency on every cached call. Setup takes one configuration flag; no code changes are required. Cache rules respect tenant boundaries, expire on your schedule, and log every hit for audit review. Dashboards show savings by provider, route, and application in real time. Cross-Provider Prompt Caching is available on all Pro and Enterprise plans. Turn it on today.
out 1263 tok (+1007 ragionamento) latenza 13.5 s
Rispetto dei vincoli (budget di parole, elenco di parole vietate, l'unica domanda), impronta stilistica, e controllo della lunghezza.
Passa dall'uno all'altro con una sola riga
Entrambi gli id sono presenti in ogni scheda qui sotto - la coppia di righe evidenziata è l'unica modifica. Stesso endpoint, stessa chiave, stessa struttura della richiesta.
from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI(
base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
api_key="sk-syn-...",
)
resp = client.chat.completions.create(
model="claude-opus-5",
# model="claude-opus-5-5", # decommenta questa riga, commenta quella sopra
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-opus-5",
// model: "claude-opus-5-5", // decommenta questa riga, commenta quella sopra
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-opus-5",
# "model": "claude-opus-5-5", # decommenta questa riga, commenta quella sopra
"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-opus-5",
// Model: "claude-opus-5-5", // decommenta questa riga, commenta quella sopra
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-opus-5")
// .model("claude-opus-5-5") // decommenta questa riga, commenta quella sopra
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));FAQ
Qual è più economico, Claude Opus 5 o Claude Opus 5.5?
Claude Opus 5.5 è più economico per input / 1m token ($4 contro $5, 1.3× di differenza). Altre righe potrebbero indicare il contrario - la tabella sopra riporta la scheda completa, e il costo reale dipende dal tuo mix.
Posso fare un A/B test di Claude Opus 5 contro Claude Opus 5.5 senza due integrazioni?
Sì. Entrambi sono serviti tramite lo stesso endpoint compatibile con OpenAI con una singola chiave API - il passaggio richiede la modifica della stringa del modello in una sola riga, quindi puoi instradare una frazione del traffico verso ciascuno e confrontare direttamente le fatture.
Claude Opus 5 e Claude Opus 5.5 supportano il prompt caching?
Sì - entrambi fatturano le letture in cache a un prezzo inferiore rispetto alla loro tariffa di input, quindi i carichi di lavoro con warm-prefix costano meno di quanto suggeriscano le tariffe di listino. Le righe esatte per la lettura in cache si trovano nella tabella dei prezzi qui sopra.