MODEL COMPARISON
An objective head-to-head of OpenAI's GPT-6.1 Sol and Anthropic's Claude Opus 5.5 across coding, writing, reasoning, context length, and price. Or use both at once in a council.
GPT-6.1 Sol wins on versatility, tool-calling, and ecosystem — it has the broadest plugin/connector library, adaptive reasoning, and a 1.05M-token context window. Claude Opus 5.5 wins on coding and writing quality — it leads SWE-bench, offers a 1M-token context window, and follows complex multi-step instructions better. On price, GPT-6.1 Sol ($2/$10 per million tokens) is half the cost of Claude Opus 5.5 ($4/$20), and Claude Sonnet 5.5 matches GPT-6.1 Sol at $2/$10. Neither model is universally better. The right answer for important work is to run both in an LLM council and let a moderator surface where they agree (consensus you can trust) and disagree (the actual hard parts of your question). For casual chat, pick whichever subscription you already have.
Council AI runs GPT-6.1 Sol and Claude Opus 5.5 in parallel on the same prompt, then a moderator model synthesizes a single answer noting where they agree and disagree. Get started.
Neither universally. GPT-6.1 Sol wins versatility, tool-calling, and ecosystem. Claude Opus 5.5 wins coding (SWE-bench leader), writing nuance, and long-context (1M). Pick by task or run both in a council.
It depends on the tier. Claude Opus 5.5 ($4/$20 per million tokens) costs twice GPT-6.1 Sol ($2/$10). Claude Sonnet 5.5 matches GPT-6.1 Sol at $2/$10, and Claude Haiku 5.5 matches GPT-6 Luna at $0.10/$0.50.
Yes. Council AI runs both in parallel and synthesizes a moderator answer. You get the strengths of both labs in one workflow.
They are nearly tied: GPT-6.1 Sol has 1.05M tokens and Claude Opus 5.5 has 1M. For even longer inputs, Grok 4.20 offers 2M.