🎁 新用戶 免費註冊,送 10 次呼叫,最高 $1,免綁卡。

Claude Sonnet 5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol

vs

何時該用哪一個 — 綜合評斷,而非基準測試數據表

這兩者形態接近——都接受文字和影像輸入、回傳文字、最大輸出 128000 token,都可以關閉思考,脈絡視窗也幾乎相同,claude-sonnet-5 為 1000000、gpt-5.6-sol 為 1050000。差距在價目表:claude-sonnet-5 每百萬輸入 $2、輸出 $10,對比 gpt-5.6-sol 的 $5 和 $30,即輸入貴 2.5 倍、輸出貴 3 倍,快取讀取也貴 2.5 倍($0.2 對 $0.5)。大批量或長脈絡工作選 claude-sonnet-5;專門想要 OpenAI 略新的一代和它明確的視覺標誌時選 gpt-5.6-sol。

定價

Claude Sonnet 5 GPT-5.6 Sol Δ
輸入 / 1M tokens $2 $5 0.4×
輸出 / 1M tokens $10 $30 0.33×
快取讀取 / 1M tokens $0.2 $0.5 0.4×
快取寫入 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) 不額外計費

費率取自建置時的即時目錄;各模型頁面皆附有目前的費率卡。

它們的相對位置 — 在此計費單位下,所有 63 個 聊天 模型的 每 1M tokens 的輸入價格(對數尺度)

能力

Claude Sonnet 5 GPT-5.6 Sol
工具使用
思考控制 可配置 可配置
結構化輸出
提示快取 顯式(由您標記前綴) 隱式(自動)
快取生命週期 5m default, 1h option 5–10m, up to 1h
最小快取前綴 1024 個 token 1024 個 token

規格

Claude Sonnet 5 GPT-5.6 Sol
輸入模態 文字 影像 文字 影像
輸出模態 文字 文字
發布日期 2026-06-30 2026-07-09
知識截止日期 2026-01 2026-02
上下文視窗 1M 1.1M
最大輸出 128K 128K
思考參數
  • thinking.type "adaptive"
  • output_config.effort
reasoning.effort
可接受的值
thinking.type
  • adaptive
  • disabled
effort
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max

"enabled" returns 400

reasoning.effort
  • none
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max
預設值

thinking on (adaptive)

effort
  • high
medium

規格摘錄自各供應商的文件;供應商未發布的資料列會直接省略,而非自行推測。 完整來源: Claude Sonnet 5 · GPT-5.6 Sol

單一提示詞,兩款模型 — 經由閘道測量

提示詞 Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. 檢查 恰好 3 句

Claude Sonnet 5 通過 · 3 sentences

Reasoning mode works by having the model generate extended internal "thinking" steps before producing its final answer, and since we're billed on total tokens, that hidden reasoning text adds significantly to what we pay for—even though you never see it in the output. This is different from simply getting longer visible responses; the model is essentially "showing its work" behind the scenes, and complex prompts can trigger thousands of extra reasoning tokens per request. The upside is improved accuracy on complex tasks, but if we want to control costs, we should selectively enable reasoning only for queries that truly need it, rather than applying it universally.

輸出 194 tok 延遲 4.3 s

GPT-5.6 Sol 通過 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning makes the model generate additional internal tokens before producing an answer, so each request consumes more billable compute. Reasoning may also increase response length, latency, tool calls, and retries, further raising per-request cost. In short, usage volume may be unchanged, but the cost per task increased enough to double the bill.

輸出 111 tok (+34 思考) 延遲 2.3 s

指令遵循(恰好三句,可數)、受眾適配(面向 CFO 的語氣),以及下方 token 計量所暴露的隱藏思考計費缺口。

提示詞 This function is supposed to return the longest run of consecutive equal items, but callers report it is off by one on single-element inputs and misses runs that end at the last index. Fix it and explain the bug in one paragraph. 檢查 修復通過測試

Claude Sonnet 5 通過 · 8/8 cases

## The Bug The function has two related off-by-one issues rooted in the same cause: `cur` and `best` are initialized to `0` instead of `1`, treating run lengths as the number of *matches* between adjacent elements rather than the number of *elements* in the run. This means a single-element input never enters the loop (since `range(1, 1)` is empty) and returns `0` instead of the correct answer of `1`. It also means that for any input, the run length is undercounted by exactly one — a run of 3 equal elements only produces 2 "match" increments, so `best` ends up as 2 instead of 3. The claim that it "misses runs that end at the last index" is actually a symptom of this same undercount: the logic does update `best` correctly on every iteration (including the last), but because it's counting matches instead of elements, the final reported value is always one less than the true longest run. […]

輸出 536 tok 延遲 7.1 s

GPT-5.6 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 function counted equal *adjacencies* rather than items, so a run of length one produced `0` and every longer run was undercounted by one. Initializing `cur` and `best` to `1` for nonempty input makes them represent item counts, resetting `cur` to `1` starts a new run at the current item, and updating `best` on every iteration ensures a run reaching the final index is included.

輸出 316 tok (+135 思考) 延遲 5.2 s

修復是否真的正確(可執行)、解釋的資訊密度,以及在一個邊界明確的任務上的 token 效率。

提示詞 Extract a JSON object with fields {company, quarter, revenue_usd_m, growth_pct, guidance} from this text. Use null for anything not stated; add no other fields. 檢查 合法 JSON,schema 精確

Claude Sonnet 5 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11.5, "guidance": null } ```

輸出 348 tok 延遲 5.3 s

GPT-5.6 Sol 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld pending the Q4 close"

{"company":"Meridian Robotics","quarter":"September quarter","revenue_usd_m":412,"growth_pct":"11+","guidance":"withheld pending the Q4 close"}

輸出 194 tok (+147 思考) 延遲 3.2 s

schema 服從度(不臆造欄位)、幻覺壓力(guidance 明確被暫緩給出),以及結構化輸出路徑的差異。

提示詞 Write a 120-word product announcement for an API gateway feature that caches prompts across providers. Forbidden words: "seamless", "unlock", "game-changer", "revolutionize", "empower". Exactly one sentence must be a question. 檢查 120 詞,0 個禁用詞

Claude Sonnet 5 通過 · 123 words, 0 banned, 1 question

## Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching We're rolling out a new caching layer for our API gateway that works across every major LLM provider you connect through it. Instead of resending identical prompts and paying full price each time, the gateway recognizes repeated requests and serves cached responses in milliseconds—regardless of whether you're routing to OpenAI, Anthropic, or Google. What does this mean for your bill and your latency? Both drop, often significantly, especially for teams running high-volume, repetitive workloads like customer support bots or batch content generation. The cache is configurable per route, with adjustable TTLs and invalidation rules, so you stay in control of freshness versus cost. Available now for all Pro and Enterprise plans. Check your dashboard to enable it today.

輸出 259 tok 延遲 4.8 s

GPT-5.6 Sol 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today, we’re introducing Provider Prompt Cache, a new API gateway feature that reuses prompt prefixes across supported AI providers, reducing latency, token costs, and duplicated processing. Teams can define cache policies once, route requests dynamically, and preserve provider flexibility without rewriting application logic. Switching models during testing or failover? The gateway identifies eligible prompt segments, applies provider-specific caching controls, and reports hits, misses, savings, and expiration details through unified logs and metrics. Configurable TTLs, tenant isolation, encryption, and cache-bypass options help teams balance performance, privacy, and freshness for every workload. Provider Prompt Cache is available today in beta through the dashboard and API, with SDK examples and migration guidance included. […]

輸出 733 tok (+564 思考) 延遲 7.7 s

約束服從度(字數預算、禁用詞表、唯一的那句問句)、文風指紋,以及長度控制。

只需一行程式碼即可在兩者間切換

以下每個頁籤中都有這兩個 ID — 醒目提示的這兩行是唯一的修改處。相同的端點,相同的金鑰,相同的請求結構。

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
    api_key="sk-syn-...",
)

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="claude-sonnet-5",
    # model="gpt-5.6-sol",  # 取消註解此行,並註解上一行
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

取得 API 金鑰 →

常見問題

Claude Sonnet 5 和 GPT-5.6 Sol 哪個比較便宜?

Claude Sonnet 5 在 輸入 / 1m tokens 上較便宜($2 對比 $5,相差 2.5×)。其他項目可能呈現相反結果 — 上表提供完整資訊,實際成本取決於您的使用組合。

我可以在不進行兩次整合的情況下,對 Claude Sonnet 5 和 GPT-5.6 Sol 進行 A/B 測試嗎?

可以。兩者皆透過同一個相容 OpenAI 的端點提供服務,並使用同一把 API 金鑰 — 切換只需更改一行的模型字串,因此您可以將部分流量分別導向兩者並直接比較帳單。

Claude Sonnet 5 與 GPT-5.6 Sol 支援提示快取嗎?

是的 — 兩者的快取讀取費率皆低於其輸入費率,因此具有暖前綴的工作負載成本會低於牌價所示。確切的快取讀取列請見上方的定價表。

相關比較