Tutorials, deep dives and product notes — built for developers.
GPT-5.6 Luna vs DeepSeek V4 Pro: a sourced comparison of coding, 1M context, reasoning modes, MIT weights, caching, pricing, tools and deployment economics.
GPT-5.6 Luna vs GLM 5.2 compared across coding, reasoning, long context, tools, pricing, licensing and deployment. After Luna's permanent 80% price cut, Luna has the stronger managed capability and economics package; GLM 5.2 brings MIT weights and openness.
GPT‑5.6 Sol, Terra, and Luna compared across official coding, agentic, professional, science, computer-use, long-context, academic, tool-use, and cybersecurity benchmarks—with pricing tables, charts, radar, and a practical routing guide.
GPT-5.6 Sol vs Terra: a detailed family comparison across pricing, 1M context, coding, professional work, science, computer use, charts, radar, and a practical routing strategy.
Hy3 (295B MoE, Apache 2.0, $0.80/1M) vs GPT-5.5 (proprietary, $30/1M). GPT-5.5 leads coding (+11-42 pts), but Hy3 fights back on agents: wins MCP Atlas (+3.8), edges HLE w/tools (+1.0), near-ties BrowseComp (84.2 vs 84.4). All at 1/37th the cost. 5 charts, full breakdown.
Claude Sonnet 5 ($2/$10, June 30 — now permanent) beats GPT-5.5 ($5/$30, April 23) on every directly comparable benchmark: +4.6 SWE-bench Pro, +2.2 Terminal-Bench 2.1, +5.2 HLE with tools. At 60% cheaper input and 67% cheaper output. Full benchmark comparison.
GLM-5.2 (62.1% Pro, MIT open-weight, $4.40/1M) beats GPT-5.5 (58.6%, $30/1M) on SWE-bench Pro by 3.5 points at 1/7 the cost. Also leads HLE w/tools (+2.5), FrontierSWE (+1.8), MCP Atlas (+1.7). GPT-5.5 counters with DeepSWE (+23.8), TB 2.1 (+3.0). Full comparison with 12 shared benchmarks from Z.AI/VentureBeat data.
GPT-5.5 and Kimi K2.6 are tied at 58.6% SWE-bench Pro. But Kimi leads HLE w/tools (54.0%), DeepSearchQA (+13.9), and Agent Swarm (300 sub-agents). GPT counters with OSWorld (+1.9), BrowseComp, Terminal-Bench (Codex CLI 82.7%), and 7.5× higher cost. The most evenly matched comparison of 2026.
GPT-5.5 (82.7% Terminal-Bench, 58.6% Pro, $30/1M) vs Gemini 3.5 Flash (83.6% MCP Atlas, 76.2% TB 2.1, $9/1M, 152 tok/s). GPT-5.5 dominates reasoning & long context. Flash dominates tool orchestration & speed. Official Google DeepMind model card data. 10-point verdict.
GPT-5.5 dominates agentic coding (+14.2 Terminal-Bench, +4.4 SWE-bench Pro). Gemini 3.1 Pro wins on price (2.5× cheaper), reasoning (GPQA 94.3%), and multimodal breadth. Real benchmarks, pricing analysis, and a 9-point decision matrix for choosing the right enterprise model.
Claude Fable 5 ($50/1M) vs GPT-5.5 ($30/1M). Fable 5 leads all 8 coding benchmarks (+11.8 avg). GPT-5.5 counters with lower price and Batch/Flex at $15. 5× better Pro value from Fable 5. The definitive head-to-head comparison.
Claude Fable 5 ($50/1M) vs GPT-5.5 Pro ($180/1M). Fable 5 leads all 8 coding benchmarks by +11.8 pts avg. GPT-5.5 Pro fights back on BrowseComp (90.1%) and FrontierMath (39.6%) via parallel compute — but has no published Pro coding scores. Updated with separate GPT-5.5 Pro benchmarks.