Claude Sonnet 4 vs GPT-5.5

Compare Claude Sonnet 4 and GPT-5.5 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Object Detection, Open Prompt, and Classification.

Compare Claude Sonnet 4 vs GPT-5.5 live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
AnthropicClaude Sonnet 4
Run to compare this model.
OpenAIGPT-5.5
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

OpenAI

Claude Sonnet 4 vs GPT-5.5: Overview

Claude Sonnet 4

Claude 4 Sonnet, released by Anthropic in May 2025, is the mid-tier model in the Claude 4 family, designed to balance capability, cost, and speed. It is multimodal, accepting both text and images, and extends beyond prior versions with improved “computer use” support, allowing API-driven interaction with desktop-like interfaces. By default, it supports 200,000 tokens of context, but as of August 2025, it also offers a 1 million-token context window in public beta—making it one of the most context-capable models available for processing entire codebases or large document sets in a single request.

Sonnet 4 is significantly cheaper than the flagship Opus while still demonstrating strong reasoning, coding, and instruction-following ability with reduced hallucinations. Its extended context capabilities and lower latency make it well-suited for enterprise-scale knowledge management, software development, research assistants, and productivity automation where both cost efficiency and high reliability are essential.

GPT-5.5

GPT-5.5 is a multimodal large language model released by OpenAI on April 23, 2026, engineered for autonomous, multi-step knowledge work and agentic workflows. It accepts text, images, and code as input, featuring enhanced spatial reasoning and visual grounding to support its computer use capabilities for operating software and navigating UI elements. Built to execute complex workflows end-to-end, the model interprets loosely defined tasks, selects appropriate tools, and performs self-verification with minimal user intervention. It is available in a standard version, a Thinking mode for extended reasoning budgets, and a Pro variant that uses parallel test-time compute for maximum precision on complex tasks.

Co-optimized with NVIDIA for GB200 NVL72 infrastructure, GPT-5.5 delivers per-token latency comparable to its predecessor GPT-5.4 while maintaining a 1-million-token context window. Despite increased capability, the model achieves greater token efficiency in coding and data analysis workflows, often completing tasks with fewer total tokens than previous versions. OpenAI reports a 60% reduction in hallucination rate compared to GPT-5.4, improving reliability for accuracy-sensitive applications. API access is available via the Responses and Chat Completions endpoints at $5 per million input tokens and $30 per million output tokens, double the unit price of GPT-5.4.

Claude Sonnet 4 vs GPT-5.5 Comparison Table

PropertyClaude Sonnet 4GPT-5.5
OrganizationAnthropicOpenAI
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateMay 2025Apr 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
Parameters
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$3.00$5.00
Output $/1M$15.00$30.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
ClassificationDemoDemo
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Foundation Vision
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts
Score key:≥75%40–74%<40%
Overall Score
68.66%
77.61%
Avg Response Time21.26s30.12s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens1.4K
Median output tokens138
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.011
Defect Detection
80%(12/15)
86.7%(13/15)
Document Understanding
88.9%(8/9)
88.9%(8/9)
Object Counting
20%(2/10)
30%(3/10)
Object Understanding
78.6%(11/14)
92.9%(13/14)
Spatial Understanding
68.4%(13/19)
78.9%(15/19)

Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology