Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol
何时用哪一个
这两款模型在形态上非常匹配：都接受文本和图像输入，返回文本，输出上限为 128,000 个 Token 并保持开启思考，其中 claude-opus-5-5 的上下文窗口为 1,000,000 个 Token，而 gpt-6.1-sol 为 1,050,000。最明显的区别在于定价表：gpt-6.1-sol 的输入为 $2 且输出为 $10，而 claude-opus-5-5 分别为 $4 和 $20，两端恰好是一半，另外缓存读取为 $0.1 对 $0.2。要在大规模下控制成本请选择 gpt-6.1-sol；如果您需要 Anthropic 定位于长期运行的智能体编程和知识工作的模型路线，及其较晚的 2026-06 知识截止日期，请选择 claude-opus-5-5。
Benchmark 成绩
GPT-6.1 Sol:厂商没有公布过 benchmark 成绩。
厂商公布: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic DeepSeek Google Moonshot OpenAI Z.ai
定价
| Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-6.1 Sol | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 输入 / 1M tokens | $4 | $2 | 2× |
| 输出 / 1M tokens | $20 | $10 | 2× |
| 缓存读取 / 1M tokens | $0.2 | $0.1 | 2× |
| 缓存写入 | 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) | 不单独收费 | - |
费率取自构建时的实时目录；每个模型页面均附有当前的费率卡。
它们的位置 — 以该计费单位计费的所有 76 个 聊天 模型的 每 1M token 的输入价格（对数刻度）
能力
| Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-6.1 Sol | |
|---|---|---|
| 工具使用 | 是 | 是 |
| 思考控制 | 始终开启 | 始终开启 |
| 结构化输出 | 是 | 是 |
| 提示词缓存 | 显式（由您标记前缀） | 隐式（自动） |
| 缓存生存时间 | 5m default, 1h option | 5-10m, up to 1h |
| 最小缓存前缀 | 1024 个 token | 1024 个 token |
规格
| Claude Opus 5.5 | GPT-6.1 Sol | |
|---|---|---|
| 输入模态 | 文本 图像 | 文本 图像 |
| 输出模态 | 文本 | 文本 |
| 发布日期 | 2026-09-22 | 2026-09-29 |
| 知识截止日期 | 2026-06 | 2026-04 |
| 上下文窗口 | 1M | 1.1M |
| 最大输出 | 128K | 128K |
| 思考参数 | output_config.effort | reasoning.effort |
| 允许的值 | output_config.effort
| reasoning.effort
|
| 默认值 | medium | medium |
规格转录自各供应商的文档；若供应商未发布某项数据，则直接省略该行，而非进行推断。 完整来源： Claude Opus 5.5 · GPT-6.1 Sol
单个 Prompt，两个模型 —— 通过网关实测
Claude Opus 5.5 通过 · 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.
输出 263 tok (+102 思考) 延迟 5.7 s
GPT-6.1 Sol 通过 · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning makes the model do more computational work before answering, and many providers bill the resulting reasoning tokens even though users never see them. That means the same number of requests can cost twice as much because each request consumes more billable tokens, even if the visible answers stay the same length. We should confirm the increase in our usage breakdown and reserve higher reasoning levels for tasks where the improvement justifies the added cost.
输出 144 tok (+54 思考) 延迟 6.6 s
指令遵循（恰好三句，可数）、受众适配（面向 CFO 的语气），以及下方 token 计量所暴露的隐藏思考计费缺口。
Claude Opus 5.5 通过 · 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. […]
输出 723 tok (+303 思考) 延迟 10.4 s
GPT-6.1 Sol 通过 · 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 counts equal adjacent pairs rather than items in a run: a run of length `n` has only `n - 1` equal pairs, so a single-element input returns `0`, and a run ending at the last index is also undercounted. It does process the last index, so the issue is not a missing final check. Initializing each nonempty run to `1` and updating `best` after every iteration correctly counts items, including singleton and trailing runs; empty inputs still return `0`.
输出 189 tok 延迟 6.3 s
修复是否真的正确（可运行）、解释的信息密度，以及在一个边界明确的任务上的 token 效率。
Claude Opus 5.5 通过 · 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.
输出 829 tok (+488 思考) 延迟 10.9 s
GPT-6.1 Sol 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending the Q4 close"
{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": null, "growth_pct": "eleven and change", "guidance": "Withheld pending the Q4 close" }
输出 345 tok (+285 思考) 延迟 10.2 s
schema 服从度（不臆造字段）、幻觉压力（guidance 明确被暂缓给出），以及结构化输出路径的差异。
Claude Opus 5.5 通过 · 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.
输出 1263 tok (+1007 思考) 延迟 13.5 s
GPT-6.1 Sol 通过 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Cache, a new API gateway feature that stores reusable prompts and manages caching across your supported AI providers. Why rebuild the same context every time your application switches models? With one configuration, teams can reuse shared instructions, standardize cache policies, and reduce repeated prompt processing wherever provider caching is available. The gateway handles provider-specific requirements while giving you clear visibility into cache hits, usage, and estimated savings. Set expiration windows, isolate cached content by project, and invalidate entries when prompts change. Your existing routing logic stays intact, so you can compare models without rebuilding your caching workflow. […]
输出 588 tok (+435 思考) 延迟 13.9 s
约束服从度（字数预算、禁用词表、唯一的那句问句）、文风指纹，以及长度控制。
只需一行代码即可在它们之间切换
两个 ID 都包含在下方的每个选项卡中 — 高亮显示的两行是唯一的修改。相同的端点，相同的密钥，相同的请求结构。
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-6.1-sol", # 取消注释此行，注释上一行
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-6.1-sol", // 取消注释此行，注释上一行
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-6.1-sol", # 取消注释此行，注释上一行
"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-6.1-sol", // 取消注释此行，注释上一行
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-6.1-sol") // 取消注释此行，注释上一行
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));常见问题
Claude Opus 5.5 和 GPT-6.1 Sol 哪个更便宜？
在 输入 / 1m tokens 方面，GPT-6.1 Sol 更便宜（$2 对比 $4，相差 2.0×）。其他行可能得出相反的结论——上方表格提供了完整信息，实际成本取决于你的组合使用情况。
我可以在不进行两次集成的情况下，对 Claude Opus 5.5 和 GPT-6.1 Sol 进行 A/B 测试吗？
可以。两者均通过同一个兼容 OpenAI 的端点提供服务，并使用同一把 API 密钥——切换只需更改一行模型字符串，因此你可以将一部分流量路由到各个模型并直接比较账单。
Claude Opus 5.5 和 GPT-6.1 Sol 支持提示词缓存吗？
是的 —— 两者对缓存读取的计费均低于其输入费率，因此热前缀工作负载的成本低于标价。准确的缓存读取行位于上方的定价表中。