Claude Opus 4 vs GPT-6 Sol
Compare Claude Opus 4 and GPT-6 Sol side-by-side.
Compare Claude Opus 4 vs GPT-6 Sol live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
These models don't share enough common tasks for a side-by-side demo. See the comparison table below for their capabilities.
Models in this comparison
Claude Opus 4 vs GPT-6 Sol Comparison Table
Evals updated September 22, 2026Pricing updated September 22, 2026
| Property | Claude Opus 4 | GPT-6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | May 2025 | Sep 2026 |
| Context Window | 200K | 1.1M |
| Parameters | undisclosed | |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $2.00 | |
| Output $/1M | $10.00 | |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | ||
| Chart Question Answering | ||
| Classification | ||
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Image Tagging | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| Object Detection | ||
| OCR | ||
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | ||
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | Deprecated | 80.7% |
| Avg cost / sample | – | $0.0065 |
| Avg speed / sample | – | 8.15s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | – | 73.6% ±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 72.9 to 74.2 |
| Object Detection (high) | – | 75.2% ±0.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 74.1 to 75.9 |
| Counting (low) | – | 74.8% ±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 77.0 |
| Counting (high) | – | 76.1% ±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 78.4 |
| Identification (low) | – | 91.7% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 93.8 |
| Identification (high) | – | 92.7% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8 |
| OCR (low) | – | 91.7% ±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.3 to 92.1 |
| OCR (high) | – | 91.9% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.6 to 92.2 |
| Data Extraction (low) | – | 80.4% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.4 to 80.4 |
| Data Extraction (high) | – | 82.5% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.4 to 83.5 |
| Reasoning (low) | – | 72.2% ±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 70.9 to 74.2 |
| Reasoning (high) | – | 77.9% ±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.5 to 80.8 |
Claude Opus 4 vs GPT-6 Sol: Overview
Claude 4 Opus, released by Anthropic in May 2025, is the flagship model of the Claude 4 family, built for complex, long-horizon reasoning and advanced coding workflows. It is multimodal, supporting text (including voice), images, and tool use, and operates as a hybrid reasoning model—able to deliver quick answers in fast mode or switch to extended thinking for deeper, multi-step problem solving. With a ~200,000-token context window and a training cutoff around March 2025, it is optimized for handling large documents, long conversations, and sophisticated agentic tasks.
Positioned at the high end of Anthropic’s offerings, Opus 4 achieves state-of-the-art results on coding benchmarks like SWE-Bench (72.5%) and Terminal-Bench (43.2%). It is best suited for research, enterprise automation, and software development at scale. The model is classified at Anthropic’s ASL-3 safety level, denoting advanced oversight and safety features.
GPT-6 Sol is a proprietary multimodal reasoning model from OpenAI, released on September 22, 2026 alongside GPT-6 Luna as an efficiency-oriented tier of the GPT-6 family that began with GPT-6 Astra. OpenAI states that Sol and Luna are trained with methods similar to those used for Astra, carrying the same work on professional tasks, factuality, coding, computer use, and alignment into models that run faster. Sol accepts text and image input and returns text output, and OpenAI documents a context window of roughly one million tokens together with a knowledge cutoff of April 20, 2026.
The model targets complex coding and agentic workflows and exposes a configurable reasoning effort setting with levels of none, low, medium, high, xhigh, and max, which trades latency and token consumption against answer quality. OpenAI reports results including 33.2% on AutomationBench at xhigh effort and 56.4% on Agents' Last Exam at max effort, while its reported DeepSWE and OSWorld 2.0 figures of 68.8% and 64.4% fall below those of the earlier GPT-5.6 Sol. Its vision behavior covers image understanding tasks such as visual question answering, captioning, document and chart interpretation, and text recognition.