Roboflow

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol

Compare Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GPT-6.1 Sol side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Classification, Object Detection, and Open Prompt.

Compare Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol 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 5.5
Run to compare this model.
OpenAIGPT-6.1 Sol
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol on Vision Evals

Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on 3 of the six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Reasoning, where GPT-6.1 Sol leads 83.7% to 76.4%.

Overall, Claude Sonnet 5.5 averages 83.8% (#8 of 61) against 85.5% (#4 of 61) for GPT-6.1 Sol.

GPT-6.1 Sol is cheaper ($0.0061 vs $0.0065 per sample), while Claude Sonnet 5.5 is faster (10.8s vs 14.3s per sample).

Claude Sonnet 5.5GPT-6.1 Sol

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol Comparison Table

Evals updated September 29, 2026Pricing updated September 29, 2026

PropertyClaude Sonnet 5.5GPT-6.1 Sol
OrganizationAnthropicOpenAI
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateSep 2026Sep 2026
Context Window1.0M1.1M
Parametersundisclosed
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$2.00$2.00
Output $/1M$10.00$10.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Promptable Concept SegmentationDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
83.8%
85.5%
Avg cost / sample$0.0065$0.0061
Avg speed / sample10.78s14.31s
By task
Object Detection (low)
74.3%
±0.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.5 to 75.3
$0.0098
80.8%
±0.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.7 to 80.9
$0.010
Object Detection (high)
76.8%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.5 to 77.3
$0.014
81.6%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.1 to 82.0
$0.022
Counting (low)
79.3%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 79.7
$0.0042
78.8%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.7 to 82.4
$0.0037
Counting (high)
82.9%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.1 to 83.8
$0.0053
80.2%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 77.0 to 83.8
$0.0057
Identification (low)
91.7%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 93.8
$0.0029
89.6%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6
$0.0025
Identification (high)
90.6%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 90.6
$0.0033
88.5%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6
$0.0030
OCR (low)
90.6%
±0.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.0 to 91.7
$0.0079
92.0%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.5 to 92.5
$0.0064
OCR (high)
90.9%
±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.2 to 92.3
$0.011
91.7%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.2 to 91.9
$0.017
Data Extraction (low)
90.7%
±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.7 to 92.8
$0.0033
88.0%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.6 to 88.7
$0.0030
Data Extraction (high)
93.1%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 92.8 to 93.8
$0.0036
90.0%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.7 to 90.7
$0.0037
Reasoning (low)
76.4%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.5 to 76.8
$0.0049
83.7%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.1 to 84.8
$0.0033
Reasoning (high)
83.9%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.1 to 85.4
$0.0061
88.7%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.4 to 91.4
$0.0042

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol: Overview

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is a proprietary multimodal language model from Anthropic and the second release in the Claude 5.5 family, following Claude Opus 5.5. It accepts interleaved text and image input and returns text, operating with a 1M token context window and a maximum output of 128K tokens per request. The model uses adaptive thinking by default, allocating variable reasoning effort per request rather than exposing a manual extended thinking toggle, and its training data cutoff is June 2026. Anthropic positions it as a faster, lower cost complement to Opus 5.5 for well scoped everyday tasks, bug fixing, and producing documents, slides, and spreadsheets.

On visual and agentic evaluations reported at launch, Sonnet 5.5 scores 61.6% on Chartography, a chart recognition test, compared with 15.6% for Claude Sonnet 5, and 80.1% on OSWorld 2.1, a computer use benchmark measuring screenshot driven control of a desktop environment, compared with 57.0% for Sonnet 5. It reports 70.6% on Terminal-Bench 4.0 for agentic coding. Anthropic describes it as the first Sonnet model able to complete Pokemon Red from screenshots alone, and it generates output more than 30% faster than Sonnet 5 while using fewer tokens for equivalent work.

GPT-6.1 Sol

GPT-6.1 Sol is a reasoning model in OpenAI's GPT-6 series that accepts text and image input and returns text. It is an upgrade to GPT-6 Sol positioned to approach the intelligence of the larger GPT-6 Astra model on agentic coding, computer use, and professional knowledge work. The model exposes an adjustable reasoning effort control, ranging from low settings for simple turns to maximum settings for harder tasks, and can be driven with tool use enabled or disabled. It operates over a context window of roughly one million tokens and emits up to 128,000 output tokens in a single response, which supports long-running agent loops over large codebases and multi-document collections. Audio and video inputs are not supported.

On the visual side, the model is evaluated on GDP.pdf, a benchmark that asks professional questions about complex PDF documents containing tables, charts, diagrams, and fine-print details, and on OSWorld 2.0, which measures agents operating graphical computer applications. OpenAI reports that GPT-6.1 Sol performs on par with or better than GPT-6 Sol across its image input safety evaluations, and that the share of responses containing a factual error at low reasoning effort falls from 11.4 percent to 7.7 percent.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, GPT-6.1 Sol performed slightly better overall. The two split the six vision tasks 3 to 3, but GPT-6.1 Sol averages 85.5% (#4 of 61) against 83.8% (#8 of 61) for Claude Sonnet 5.5. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

No. On the Vision Evals Reasoning benchmark at low effort, GPT-6.1 Sol leads with 83.7% against 76.4%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

GPT-6.1 Sol is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0061 per sample against $0.0065. Claude Sonnet 5.5 is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $10.00 per 1M output; GPT-6.1 Sol is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $10.00 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 10.8s per inference against 14.3s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.

Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for image captioning and OCR in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.