claude-opus-5-5 real-task evaluations

Every report keeps its original task, method, finding, limitation, evaluator identity and verification date. A community report is evidence about that run, not a universal score.

  • Claude Opus 5.5 and GPT-6 Sol on one interactive website prompt

    By Kappaemme (@Kappaemme1926). X user who posted this side-by-side test Published 2026-09-23; retrieved 2026-09-24; verified 2026-09-24.

    Task
    Build an interactive website about imaginary planets from a single prompt
    Method
    Same prompt with both models on High; the author reported wall-clock time, how much each result covered and the share of each subscription's usage.
    Finding
    Opus 5.5 took 26 minutes and built a fuller, explorable solar system with more detail, using 16% of the $20 plan's usage; GPT-6 Sol took 10 minutes for three planets and 1% of the $200 plan's usage.
    Limitation
    One prompt judged by the author; the usage shares are meters of two different subscription plans, not API costs.

  • Four models build the Eiffel Tower in Three.js

    By Bhavy (@Bhavani_00007). X user who ran the same Three.js task on four models and reported cost and time Published 2026-09-23; retrieved 2026-09-24; verified 2026-09-24.

    Task
    Build the Eiffel Tower in Three.js
    Method
    Same task on Claude Opus 5.5, GPT-6 Astra, GPT-6 Sol and Kimi K3; the author reported cost and time for each and compared the results by eye.
    Finding
    Opus 5.5 cost $8.95 and took 10 minutes; the author preferred its frontend and 3D detailing to GPT-6 Astra's ($7.45, 8 minutes), found GPT-6 Sol ($3.90, 5 minutes) disappointing and Kimi K3 ($4.04, 6 minutes) strong for the price.
    Limitation
    One task judged by eye by the author; the post does not say how the models were run or how the costs were counted.

  • Claude Pro, Codex Plus and SuperGrok on the same work at maximum settings

    By shownotover (@shownotover). X user comparing $20 AI subscriptions in their first video Published 2026-09-24; retrieved 2026-09-24; verified 2026-09-24.

    Task
    One piece of work run on each $20 subscription; the task itself is shown only in the author's video
    Method
    Each plan's top model at maximum reasoning (Grok 4.7 at xhigh); the author recorded the share of the weekly limit, tokens, working time and a 1–10 quality score.
    Finding
    Opus 5.5 used 10% of the weekly limit (115 million tokens) over 2 hours and scored 5/10, behind GPT-6 Sol at 7/10 (29 million tokens, 69 minutes) and Grok 4.7 at 6/10; the author still recommends Claude at $20 for its usage allowance.
    Limitation
    The post does not describe the task, the quality score is the author's own, and the numbers are subscription meters rather than API usage.

  • Eight weeks of Claude Code usage re-priced at Opus 5 and Opus 5.5 rates

    By Drasezv (u/Drasezv). r/ClaudeCode member who built the transcript-reading tool the analysis comes from Published 2026-09-23; retrieved 2026-09-24; verified 2026-09-24.

    Task
    Price every request from eight weeks of the author's own Claude Code transcripts at Opus 5 and Opus 5.5 list prices
    Method
    Requests deduplicated by requestId and priced per row, with cache reads, 1h and 5m cache writes, output and plain input counted separately.
    Finding
    97% of the tokens were cache reads, so the same usage came to $2,849 at Opus 5.5 rates against $5,071 at Opus 5 rates — 44% less, rather than the 20% the headline input and output prices suggest.
    Limitation
    It re-prices the same token counts and does not measure whether Opus 5.5 uses more or fewer tokens on the same work; list prices, not subscription billing; the author built the tool that read the transcripts.