Claude Sonnet 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) vs GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Claude Sonnet 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-reasoning) by OpenAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-27.
Depends on your budget
Claude Sonnet 5.5 (High, Default Fallba… scores 26.0 points higher (46.8 vs 20.8) but costs 4.0× as much to run the benchmark ($1027 vs $256; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Sonnet 5.5 (High, Default Fallba… when you need intelligence above 20.8, and GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-reasoning) when 20.8 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) | GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.8 | 20.8 | −55.6% GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-re… is 55.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,027.40 | $255.77 | −75.1% GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-re… is 75.1% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 16.58s | 4.90s | −70.4% GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-re… is 70.4% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $10.0 | $2.00 / $12.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-reasoning) vs Claude Sonnet 5.5 (High, Default Fallback): 55.6% less intelligence, 75.1% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 70.4% faster end-to-end.
Against the frontier
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- GPT-5.6 Terra (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-sonnet-5-5-high/gpt-5-6-terra-non-reasoning · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-sonnet-5-5-high/gpt-5-6-terra-non-reasoning?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill