Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) vs GPT-6.1 Terra (High)
Which is better for the money: Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or GPT-6.1 Terra (High) 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 (Xhigh, Default Fallb… scores 8.0 points higher (51.9 vs 43.9) but costs 9.1× as much to run the benchmark ($2177 vs $239; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallb… when you need intelligence above 43.9, and GPT-6.1 Terra (High) when 43.9 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) | GPT-6.1 Terra (High) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 51.9 | 43.9 | −15.4% GPT-6.1 Terra (High) is 15.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,176.82 | $238.53 | −89.0% GPT-6.1 Terra (High) is 89.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 34.85s | 11.16s | −68.0% GPT-6.1 Terra (High) is 68.0% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $10.0 | $1.00 / $5.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GPT-6.1 Terra (High) vs Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback): 15.4% less intelligence, 89.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 68.0% faster end-to-end.
Against the frontier
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
- GPT-6.1 Terra (High) 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-xhigh/gpt-6-1-terra-high · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-sonnet-5-5-xhigh/gpt-6-1-terra-high?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill