Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6 Sol
什麼情況選哪一個
這兩者在規格上十分接近：相同的發布日期、相同的 128,000 最大 output、text 與 image 輸入及 text 輸出，以及每百萬 cache 讀取 $0.2，但 claude-opus-5-5 兩端的成本恰好是 gpt-6-sol 的 2x，每百萬為 $4/$20 相較於 $2/$10，且其 1,000,000-token window 亦略小於 1,050,000。當你需要其無法被關閉的 always-on thinking 模式，以及較晚的 2026-06 知識截止日期時，請選擇 claude-opus-5-5。若要獲得減半的 token 成本、稍微較大的 context，以及在便宜的高用量呼叫中停用 thinking 的選項，請選擇 gpt-6-sol。
Benchmark 成績
供應商公布： Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic DeepSeek Google Moonshot OpenAI Z.ai
定價
| Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-6 Sol | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 輸入 / 1M tokens | $4 | $2 | 2× |
| 輸出 / 1M tokens | $20 | $10 | 2× |
| 快取讀取 / 1M tokens | $0.2 | $0.2 | = |
| 快取寫入 | 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) | 不額外計費 | - |
費率取自網站建置時的即時目錄；各模型頁面都列有最新的價目。
兩者的相對位置：每 1M tokens 的輸入價格，涵蓋同一計費單位下全部 77 個聊天模型（對數尺度）
功能
| Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-6 Sol | |
|---|---|---|
| 工具使用 | 是 | 是 |
| 思考控制 | 一律開啟 | 可設定 |
| 結構化輸出 | 是 | 是 |
| 提示詞快取 | 顯式（由你標記前綴） | 隱式（自動） |
| 快取存活時間 | 5m default, 1h option | 5-10m, up to 1h |
| 最小快取前綴 | 1024 個 token | 1024 個 token |
規格
| Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-6 Sol | |
|---|---|---|
| 輸入模態 | 文字 圖像 | 文字 圖像 |
| 輸出模態 | 文字 | 文字 |
| 發布日期 | 2026-09-22 | 2026-09-22 |
| 知識截止日期 | 2026-06 | 2026-04 |
| 上下文視窗 | 1M | 1.1M |
| 最大輸出 | 128K | 128K |
| 思考參數 | output_config.effort | reasoning.effort |
| 可接受的值 | output_config.effort
| reasoning.effort
|
| 預設值 | medium | medium |
規格摘錄自各供應商的文件；供應商沒有公布的項目就直接略過，不自行推測。 完整來源： Claude Opus 5.5 · GPT-6 Sol
同一段提示詞，兩個模型，經閘道實測
Claude Opus 5.5 通過 · 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.
輸出 263 tok (+102 思考) 延遲 5.7 s
GPT-6 Sol 通過 · 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.
輸出 188 tok (+111 思考) 延遲 5.0 s
是否照指令做（剛好三句，數得出來）、語氣是否貼合對象（寫給 CFO 看），以及下方 token 計量顯示出的隱藏思考計費落差。
Claude Opus 5.5 通過 · 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. […]
輸出 723 tok (+303 思考) 延遲 10.4 s
GPT-6 Sol 通過 · 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.
輸出 206 tok (+59 思考) 延遲 5.9 s
修正是否真的正確（跑得起來）、說明的資訊密度，以及在範圍明確的任務上的 token 效率。
Claude Opus 5.5 通過 · 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.
輸出 829 tok (+488 思考) 延遲 10.9 s
GPT-6 Sol 通過 · 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"}
輸出 227 tok (+185 思考) 延遲 5.2 s
是否遵守 schema（不自創欄位）、面對幻覺誘因的表現（題目明確不給 guidance），以及結構化輸出路徑的差異。
Claude Opus 5.5 通過 · 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.
輸出 1263 tok (+1007 思考) 延遲 13.5 s
GPT-6 Sol 通過 · 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.
輸出 586 tok (+443 思考) 延遲 7.7 s
是否遵守限制（字數上限、禁用詞清單、只能有一句問句）、文字風格的特徵，以及長度控制。
改一行程式碼就能在兩者之間切換
下面每個頁籤都列了這兩個模型 ID，要改的只有醒目標示的那兩行。端點、金鑰和請求格式都不變。
from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI(
base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
api_key="sk-syn-...",
)
resp = client.chat.completions.create(
model="claude-opus-5-5",
# model="gpt-6-sol", # 取消這一行的註解，並把上一行註解掉
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-5-5",
// model: "gpt-6-sol", // 取消這一行的註解，並把上一行註解掉
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-5-5",
# "model": "gpt-6-sol", # 取消這一行的註解，並把上一行註解掉
"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-5-5",
// Model: "gpt-6-sol", // 取消這一行的註解，並把上一行註解掉
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-5-5")
// .model("gpt-6-sol") // 取消這一行的註解，並把上一行註解掉
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));常見問題
Claude Opus 5.5 和 GPT-6 Sol 哪個比較便宜？
以「輸入 / 1M tokens」來看，GPT-6 Sol 比較便宜（$2 對 $4，相差 2.0×）。其他項目的結果可能相反，完整價目請看上表；實際成本要看你的用量組合。
可以只串接一次，就對 Claude Opus 5.5 和 GPT-6 Sol 做 A/B 測試嗎？
可以。兩個模型都走同一個 OpenAI 相容端點，用的也是同一把 API 金鑰，切換時只要改一行裡的模型名稱字串。你可以把一部分流量分別導到兩邊，再直接比較帳單。
Claude Opus 5.5 與 GPT-6 Sol 支援提示詞快取嗎？
支援。兩者的快取讀取費率都低於輸入費率，所以前綴已經進快取的工作負載，實際成本會比官網價算出來的低。確切的快取讀取價格請見上方定價表。