GPT 5.5 VS Claude Opus 4.7

What this episode is about

In this episode of "GPT 5.5 VS Claude Opus 4.7," the host shares insights from an intensive week of using both AI models in real-world coding scenarios, revealing their performance through detailed benchmarks and personal experiences. While GPT 5.5 shows slight improvements over its predecessor, the host argues that Claude Opus 4.7 outperforms it in critical coding tasks, particularly in identifying bugs. Listeners will gain valuable perspectives on the practical applications of these AI tools, helping them make informed decisions about which model best suits their needs in vibe coding and beyond.

Key takeaways

• GPT 5.5: the 'intelligent' model that found the bug while Claude Opus 4.7 sent me on a wild goose chase.
• GPT 5.5's leap? More like a baby step—just 0.9% better than its predecessor, not exactly a quantum leap!
• Claude Opus 4.7 may have some charm, but when it comes to pinpointing bugs, GPT 5.5 is the Sherlock Holmes of AI.
• Vibe coding pays off: $15,000 in a week proves that the right AI can turn hours into dollars!
• Benchmarking: where GPT 5.5 scored high, but not high enough to make a splash in the coding pool.

What is discussed, and when

1. 0:00 – 5:00: GPT 5.5, Claude Opus 4.7, Bridge Mind, Bridge Space
2. 5:00 – 10:00: Claude Opus 4.7, GPT 5.5, Artificial Analysis, Bridge Mind
3. 10:00 – 15:00: Claude Opus 4.7, GPT 5.5, Artificial Analysis, Bridge Voice
4. 15:00 – 20:00: Claude Opus 4.7, GPT 5.5, Design Arena
5. 20:00 – 24:01: Claude Opus 4.7, GPT 5.5, Bridge Mind, Bridge Space

Notable quotes from "GPT 5.5 VS Claude Opus 4.7"

• Over the past week, I've worked for over 90 hours Vibe coating with GPT 5.5 and Claude Opus 4.7.

  about Claude Opus 4.7 · at 0:00

• But really the benchmark that I'm most interested in, when Vibe coding is the SW Bench Pro Benchmark and SW Bench Verified Benchmark.

  about SW Bench Pro Benchmark · at 1:32

• Now, the first example that I wanna show you guys is this scenario where I gave GPT 5.5 and Claude Opus 4.7, the same prompt, to try and find a bug that I was having inside of Bridge Mind.

  about Bridge Mind · at 3:30

• The reason that this is happening is because GPT 5.5 is the most intelligent model in the world, as you guys can see here from the artificial analysis intelligence index, GPT 5.5 ranks number one.

  about Artificial Analysis · at 5:13

• So here's GPT 5.5 on Design Arena.

  about Design Arena · at 7:59

• One really interesting benchmark is the LM Arena Benchmark.

  about LM Arena Benchmark · at 9:28

Who and what is mentioned in this episode?

Companies & orgs

• Artificial Analysis — Company · 4 mentions · first at 5:20
• Bridge Mind — Company · 3 mentions · first at 3:40
• Bridge Voice — Company · 3 mentions · first at 3:50
  So the bug at hand was that we had just introduced a new ultra subscription and users that were on this Ultra subscription were having trouble accessing Bridge Voice because…
• Bridge Space — Company · 2 mentions · first at 0:07
  I made $15,000 in the last week with the launch of Bridge Space three, which I used.

Products & tech

• Claude Opus 4.7 — Product · 29 mentions · first at 0:03
• GPT 5.5 — Product · 28 mentions · first at 0:03
  Over the past week, I've worked for over 90 hours Vibe coating with GPT 5.5 and Claude Opus 4.7.

Places & events

• Design Arena — Event · 3 mentions · first at 7:59
• SW Bench Pro Benchmark — Event · 1 mention · first at 1:36
• LM Arena Benchmark — Event · 1 mention · first at 9:28

Full transcript with timestamps

0:00 Over the past week, I've worked for over 90 hours Vibe coating with GPT 5.5 and Claude Opus 4.7. I made $15,000 in the last week with the launch of Bridge Space three, which I used. Claude Opus 4.7 to help me launch. In this video, I'm gonna be telling you guys which model I think is better, GBT 5.5. Or Claude Opus 4.7. As you guys can see here, this is what my workflow has actually looked like over the past week. I've been using Codex Agents, I've been using Claude Code Agents, but I really want to cover everything that there is to know about both of these models now that we have them.

0:36 I'm gonna be sharing with you a couple different scenarios of how these models have performed in my workflow over the past week. We're gonna be taking a look at Bridge Bench. We're gonna be taking a look at. Other important benchmarks and really what I wanna do with this video is give you guys an accurate view of how these models are performing. I don't wanna hype things up, as you guys know. I don't wanna be a content creator. Vibe coding is always gonna be my first thing that I just love doing. Content creation is something that I do after the fact.

1:04 So what I'm just gonna do is I'm just gonna try and give you guys a. Very concise view of how these models are performing, what I think of them, and give you some real world examples of how they're performing in real vibe coding workflows. Okay? The first thing that I'm gonna cover is the benchmarks that were released with the GPT 5.5 launch. So as you guys can see here, terminal bench 2.0, GPT 5.5 does very good in this benchmark. It always has. It scores an 82.7% in this benchmark versus Claude Opus 4.7 69.4%. But really the benchmark that I'm most interested in, when Vibe coding is the SW Bench Pro Benchmark and SW Bench Verified Benchmark.

1:40 So if you guys look at this, this is the blog. That was released by OpenAI, and I just wanna show you how far down the benchmark is hidden for SW Bench Pro. So keep, keep scrolling, keep scrolling. Keep scrolling. Keep scrolling. Keep scrolling. Keep scrolling, keep scrolling. Okay. Here it is. So here is the SW Bench Pro Benchmark hidden in this blog. And what you're gonna see when you actually dive deep on this is that GPT 5.5 is actually not that big of an improvement from GPT 5.4. if you guys look right here, let me just kind of highlight this to you.

2:10 So, GPT 5.4 scored a 57.7% on SW Bench Pro and GBT 5.5 scores a 58.6% on SW Bench Pro. So a very small incremental improvement from five point. Four to 5.5. And when you do compare that to Opus 4.7, you're gonna see that Opus 4.7 MOGs on this benchmark, it's at 64.3% versus 58.6%. Now this benchmark, you can say that, okay, these labs are be maxing, we'll give GPT 5.5, a little bit of the benefit of the doubt, but in general. This is what I have noticed from 5.5 is that when, rumors were going around about 5.5 being released, it was like everybody was saying, Spud, this is the biggest leap since you know oh one.

2:55 This was not a leap GPT 5.5 from the use that I've had with it. Is it an incremental improvement? It's not a leap, and I think that this benchmark does prove that a little bit. Like when you look at 5 57 0.7 versus 58.6, you're not gonna see, you're not gonna feel a big jump in vibe coding capabilities when the Sweep Bench Pro, which is a coding benchmark, only improved by 0.9%, literally under a percent. So that's what I'm seeing with GBT 5.5. But let's move on with some actual real world examples. Now, the first example that I wanna show you guys is this scenario where I gave GPT 5.5 and Claude Opus 4.7, the same prompt, to try and find a bug that I was having inside of Bridge Mind.

3:41 So the bug at hand was that we had just introduced a new ultra subscription and users that were on this Ultra subscription were having trouble accessing Bridge Voice because initially Bridge Voice was prog, which just means that only pro subscribers could use it. But now we added in an. Additional subscription tier that people weren't unable to use Bridge Voice that had that higher subscription tier, even though they should have, right? So I gave the same prompt to GPT 5.5 and Claude Opus 4.7 and Claude Opus 4.7. It came back to me and the number one reason that it said it could be, it came back with me with three options.

4:17 So it didn't actually find the bug, it said, Hey, here are three things. That could potentially be causing this bug. And the first thing on that list was double check your environment variables. And I have to say, this actually like gas lit me. I was like, okay, I know they're set. And this issue that we're having has nothing to do with environment variables. So that gas lit me in GBT 5.5 though. If you look at this, you can see it came back and it just said the smoking gun. Is in Stripe service has active pro subscription, and it found the bug.

4:48 It was just related to the subscription guard. Okay? And when I gave them these prompts, I was like, you know what? That's probably the issue is it's something associated with the enum, something associated with the subscription guard. And I knew that going into it. But GPT 5.5 found this immediately. Okay, and Claude Opus 4.7. If I was only using Opus 4.7, it would've sent me on a wild goose chase checking my environment variables, whereas G PT 5.5 was able to find this immediately. The reason that this is happening is because GPT 5.5 is the most intelligent model in the world, as you guys can see here from the artificial analysis intelligence index, GPT 5.5 ranks number one.

5:25 Scoring 60, which is three points higher than Claude Opus 4.7 in Gemini, 3.1 Pro, and the legacy model GBT 5.4. So when you're working in the backend, when you're working on tasks where, let's say you have a bug. GPT 5.5 is actually going to excel. The next thing that I wanna show you guys is something that you can now do using GPT 5.5 codex that you can't do with Claude Opus 4.7. So check this out. Last week we got two things from opening ai. We got GPT Image two, and we got GPT 5.5. So if you didn't know. GPT Image two is now by far the best image gen model on the market.

6:05 Nothing even comes close. If you look at Ella Marina here, you can see that GPT Image two is literally more than 200 elo above any other model. It's insane. So it crushes nano banana and it's not even close. But what I've been doing is I've been using. GPT 5.5 inside of Codex, and what you can now do is you can now actually prompt Codex to create images for you inside of your website. So let's say that you need infographic images, which I did for this. GPT 5.5 was able to create the images inside of Codex. So I literally just prompted Codex here on the left and I said, Hey, I want you to.

6:43 Look at this page. I want you to actually create an infographic image that would flow with the website and it, this is what it created. It created this image that you see here and it created this image that you see here. So it's not perfect, but this is something that you can now do using GPT 5.5 and Codex that you couldn't do with Claude Opus 4.7 in Claude Code because they don't even have an image model, right? So this was an interesting, thing that I did last week that. I think I did it on the Bridge Voice page too.

7:11 Let's go over to Bridge Voice. I'm pretty sure I created an image over there as well. let's check it out. So yeah, I did the same thing. So this here, this was an image that was created to represent Bridge Voice and it did another one here. So these images were created using GBT 5.5 codex, and this is just something really interesting that you can do using GPT 5.5 Codex that you can't do using Claude Opus 4.7. One of the biggest issues with GPT 5.5. Is its front end design capabilities and with the launch of GPT 5.5, everybody was saying, Hey, the UI design capabilities are gonna be way better.

7:46 We're working on it. It's gonna be really good at front end design. And this is not the case, especially after using it in my vibe coding work. Flow. I can confirm that this is not a good front end design model. So here's GPT 5.5 on Design Arena. So this is a leaderboard that basically measures the design capabilities of a model. And as you guys can see here, GPT 5.5 is way behind on this list. It's ranked number 11 in design arena, whereas Claude Opus 4.6 and Claude Opus 4.7 are way. Upfront, especially like if you use the front end design plugin, which I use.

8:26 Claude Opus 4.7 just does an incredible job on design and GBT 5.5 doesn't even come close. I used Claude Opus 4.7 to completely redesign the Bridge Mind website. And if we just kind of scroll down the landing page. Okay. What you're gonna notice is that, yeah, like if you use that front end design. Plugin. It's actually going to do an incredibly good job. It creates unique components. It changes the layouts, it changes the backgrounds. It has animations. It makes each section feel like its own. You can see with the subtle background changes, it's, it's very good and it does a very good job.

9:01 And GBT 5.5 just still gives you that AI look. And I think that when you're talking about front end design, you want it to have a custom feel. You want it to have a non. AI feel. 'cause if you have a beautiful design for your product, your product is just gonna do better. So design is an incredibly important aspect of vibe coding. So the fact that GBT 5.5 isn't doing a good job on this is a huge problem. One really interesting benchmark is the LM Arena Benchmark. So this is a benchmark that basically puts models head to head and users vote on which they think is better.

9:37 And it's anonymous, but G PT 5.5, ranks number nine. On the code benchmark, but I want you to know that this code benchmark, it's actually a UI benchmark because most of what people create in this benchmark is they create single HTML files. They create like react websites, and then they vote on it. And what you can see here is this benchmark. It's a UI benchmark. So I think that it's getting harder and harder for us to be able to benchmark these models. And the reason that GPT 5.5 performs so poorly on this benchmark as well as the design arena benchmark is that, yeah, GPT 5.5 is terrible at design.

10:15 You just can't use it. For front end design and Claude Opus 4.7 Excels in it. It's the best design model, and if you're designing, you pretty much have to use Claude Opus 4.7, in my opinion. The next thing that I wanna talk about is pricing, and I want you guys to know that GPT 5.5 came with a significant price hike. So if you look at GBT 5.4, GBT 5.4 was priced at $2 and 50 cents per million on the input. $15 per million on the output. GPT 5.5 now got a 100% increase in the cost, $5 per million on the input, and $30 per million on the output, making it more expensive than Claude Opus 4.7, which is priced at $5 per million on the input and $25 per million on the output.

11:02 But every time that I make a post about this on x. People go crazy and there's a reason for that. So if you pull up the token efficiency, this is where things get a little bit more complicated when it comes to pricing. So let's just go down to, token efficiency here. If you look at the token efficiency, what you're gonna see is that even though GBT 5.5 is priced higher, then Claude Opus 4.7, when you're actually using GPT 5.5. In a workflow, it's gonna cost you less tokens than Claude Opus 4.7. So check this out. To run it through this benchmark, it did cost $3,357 for GBT 5.5 and for Claude Opus 4.7 it was 50% more expensive.

11:44 You can see Claude Opus 4.7 cost $4,800. One thing that you do need to look at though, is that Claude Opus 4.6. Was more expensive to run than Claude Opus 4.7, meaning that Anthropic made it a little bit cheaper. The token efficiency is a little bit better with Claude Opus 4.7 versus Claude Opus 4.6, but then GPT 5.5, it is more expensive than GPT 5.4. Look at this. What is that? Maybe like a little bit under 20%, maybe like 18%, 28 50. Versus 33 57, so it is more expensive. GBT 5.5 is more expensive than GBT 5.4.

12:20 Now it's not more expensive than Claude Opus 4.7, but you guys do need to know that like, yeah, it got more expensive to use GPT 5.5, and I have noticed in my chat, GBT Pro subscription, the usage limits now are a thing. The next thing that I wanna talk about is speed, because speed is very interesting. When you look at the artificial analysis benchmark, it does say that GPT 5.5 is faster than Claude Opus 4.7. But just so you guys know, artificial analysis has a partnership with OpenAI. I think that you can see this plain as day because as soon as OpenAI released the model, it wasn't available via the API.

12:56 And immediately the results were in artificial analysis. And it's possible that OpenAI was able to work with artificial analysis to make sure that they got the best speeds or something because they benchmarked this at 72 tokens per second. And Claude Opus 4.7 at 46 tokens per second. So what I wanna do is I actually want to go over to Open Router and as you can. C in open router. the throughput, the tokens per second is 46.5 tokens per second. for Claude Opus 4.7. But if you look at GBT 5.5, look at this, the throughput, the tokens per second is 37 tokens per second via open ai.

13:33 So literally half of the speed that's represented in artificial analysis, which is just insane. In real vibe, coding workflows codex with GPT 5.5 is insanely slow. This is an example from yesterday, so as you guys can see, I asked Claude Code and GPT 5.5 and Codex. What version is Bridge Voice on Claude Code came back to me after 10 seconds. All it had to do. All it had to do was look at the package json file, and Codex came back to me after over two minutes and it said, oh, it's on this version. Why does Codex take so long to come back to me with such simple tasks?

14:11 I'm literally on GBT 5.5 high here, and it took that long to come back to me, where with Claude Opus 4.7 I was on high effort there as well. And it just takes way longer for Codex to do anything, even the simplest of tasks. I did get the chance to put both GPT 5.5 and Claude Opus 4.7 through Bridge Bench. And I think that the results are actually pretty surprising. for me personally looking at this, it's very surprising to see the results on Bridge Bench. This is the world's number one vibe coding benchmark, which puts it through different categories of vibe coding tasks.

14:44 Okay? And the hallucination benchmark is the first thing that I wanna cover. So if you look at this. Claude Opus 4.7. It ranks number five on the hallucination benchmark, and all the way down here, GBT 5.5 at number 13, GBT still has not solved its hallucination Problem hallucination is basically where AI models will fabricate false claims, and if you have a model that hallucinates as much as GBT five point. Five, it's gonna be very difficult to get any real work done or solve issues because the hallucination rate, it can be super confident in telling you that, hey, this is correct and it's just not correct.

15:22 Another thing that I noticed is that GPT 5.4 to GPT 5.5, it actually regressed in its reasoning capabilities. So look at this. G PT 5.4, scored a 40.6 on this benchmark, and G PT 5.5 scored a 39 point. Seven on this benchmark. Whereas with 4.6 to 4.7, it actually saw a pretty big jump. It went from number nine to number four. So this is one thing that I want to talk about. I've been vibe coding for over three years now, and I've been in the space for some pretty big leaps. Okay GPT-4 oh. Was a leap in capability. Oh one was a leap in capability.

16:00 Opus 4.5 was a leap in capability, and what I wanna say is that Opus 4.7 and GPT 5.5, neither of these models are leaps. If you look at the overall rankings on Bridge Bench, what you're gonna notice is that Claude Opus 4.6 and Claude Opus 4.7 are literally right next to each other. Same thing with G pt 5.4 and 5.5, and in fact, it actually regressed a little bit for both. And you may look at that and be like, what? Look at, look at all this and look at all that. And guys, like I said, I've been in this space long enough to know.

16:35 When a model is a leap and neither of these models are leaps. Look at this. Claude Opus 4.6 to Claude Opus 4.7 on bridge bench Security, 81.6 to 76. Okay, anthropic acknowledged that Opus 4.7 was not as good at coding security as Opus 4.6, and this is reflected in bridge bench. If you look at the UI capabilities, look at this. UI Opus 4.6 to Opus 4.7 81.1 to 78.4. This is also backed by Design Arena. Look at this. Opus 4.6 scores better on design arena than Opus 4.7. People think that Opus 4.6 is better than Opus 4.7 on design.

17:10 It's reflected in Bridge Bench. Okay, so there's multiple sources that you can pull together, and I will say this. Neither of these models are actually that good of improvements. I think that there's so much hype in the space and there's so many people that as soon as a new model comes out, they have no idea what they're talking about. They aren't even like really vibe coders, right? And they get a new model and they look at the benchmarks that the AI companies are providing and they're like, oh my gosh. This is the best thing since sliced bread.

17:39 This thing is insane. This might be a GI, and this is just not the case. I hate to say it, but we were really excited for both of these models. Opus 4.7 and GBT 5.5. But the truth of it is that neither of these models are actually that good of improvements. I've been using this, like I said, 90 hours last week, and I'm like, honestly. Neither of these are actually big improvements. With that being said, I do want to circle back and answer the question, Hey. Which model should I be using for vibe coding, GPT 5.5, or Claude Opus 4.7.

18:13 Which one is better? And I'll say this, Claude Opus 4.7 is the better overall choice across all different categories. It does score higher and it does perform better for Vibe coding. But like I said earlier in the video, you know, hey GBT five point. Five is inherently a more intelligent model with better IQ scores than Claude Opus 4.7. So I do, and I'll always say this, there is room for both in your workflow. So if you have the budget, you know I have two Claude Max subscriptions. I did recently cancel one of those because I do think that GPT 5.5.

18:49 Can now be used as your main driver for like backend work. You know, if you go back to this example, hey, GPT 5.5 was able to immediately find this bug in my backend where Claude Opus 4.7 sent me on a goose chase. Another thing to take into account is the cost efficiency. Claude Opus 4.7. With a max subscription, $200 a month, I hit my rate limits in the five hour block inside of two hours every single day. And with Codex with GPT 5.5, with the chat GPT Pro subscription, I don't hit my limits. They're a thing now that GPT 5.5 is a little bit more expensive, but with the chat GBT Pro subscription, the $200 plan, I have no.

19:30 Issues with rate limits. So that's another thing where, hey, if you are a budget vibe coder, you have to go with GPT 5.5 because of the cost efficiency. Like you can't be running Claude Opus 4.7 if your budget is $20 a month. So if you have a budget of $20 a month. Then the answer is GPT 5.5. Go with that one. But if overall, no budget, right? $200 a month budget. Hey, Claude Opus 4.7 is inherently the best coding model on the market. It hallucinates less, it has better reasoning capabilities, it has better design capabilities.

20:02 It's faster, it's more reliable. And I find myself using both. And that's one precursor that I do want to say is that GBT 5.5 is an incredibly capable model, especially on the backend and especially when it comes to rate limits. But I do think that you do get what you pay for. And there is a reason that Claude Opus 4.7 is a more expensive model, right? Like that's just economics 1 0 1. There's a reason that Claude Opus 4.7 is more expensive, and in my opinion in a lot of instances is because, yeah, I mean, it is a better.

20:34 Model GBT 5.5. Sometimes I find myself using it and I'll build one thing and break to others, and I'm like, okay, why did you do that? Well, I forgot it's 'cause your hallucination rate is so high, right? So you'll do one thing and then you'll just hallucinate. About breaking two other features that were linked to this one. So, you know, that's what I find it doing. But there are so many instances, right? There's so many arguments, right? And I think that this is the biggest thing that I wanna emphasize is that both of these models are incredible.

21:02 And what it really comes down to is your preference. I find myself gravitating towards Claude Opus 4.7. Claude Opus 4.7 built this browser tool for me inside of Bridge Space here. So look at Bridge Space. I now have a browser tool where I can select HTML elements. I now have this super cool bridge feature, so watch this. Open six more Claude Code agents in this one. You know this here, this is an agent that literally works inside of my workspace and I can talk to it and it's able to do things for me. Six more clouds up.

21:32 So you know, this was built using Claude Code with Claude Opus 4.7, done six more clouds spinning up. There's also a notification system that I built using Claude Opus 4.7. just the entire design that. C was built using Claude Opus 4.7. So I find myself personally using Claude Opus 4.7 GPT 5.5. I think that it does excel in backend. I think that there are, you know, different instances where, for example, hey, if you get a bad result with Claude code on the backend or something related to security, hey, pass it into GPT 5.5.

22:04 It's gonna think longer, and it's gonna take a little bit longer to get to that result. Probably is gonna get the result in the backend code pretty well. So that's one thing to note is that, hey, you need to account so many different things and you can't just look at one benchmark to know this model is better than that one. I think that this is such a complex discussion that we're having, and I would love to hear what you guys think in the comments below. Let me know which model you're using and why. It actually helps me a ton.

22:33 Just to hear from the Bridge Mind Community, which is the home of the Vibe coding movement, just what people are using. If you haven't already joined the Bridge Mind community, make sure you do. So. There's a link to the discord in the pinned comment as well as the description. And if you haven't already liked and subscribed and turned on post notifications. Make sure you do so, so you get updates from the channel. I'm pretty much live every day that I'm able to, vibe cleaning an app until I make a million dollars.

22:57 I'm currently at 144,000 in a RR but ultimately guys, I have just not been very impressed with either model. Opus 4.7 and 5.5. I think that both of these models were hyped up quite a bit and the hype was bigger than the results. we were expecting a monumental leap. Neither model was a monumental leap. There were small incremental improvements across several key categories. They are better models for sure, but just not across. All different categories, and it's not the leap that we were hoping for. But with that being said, I do recommend Claude Opus 4.7, and I also recommend getting both subscriptions and using GPT 5.5.

23:36 I recommend g PT 5.5 if you're on a budget. G PT 5.5 excels in backend. Claude Opus 4.7 excels in front end and reasoning, so it's a, it's a big. Topic of discussion, right? But you guys will see me use Claude Code, definitely more so in streams than Codex, just because that's what builds for me. That's what I find building for me, and that's what works for me. But with that being said, I will see you guys in the future.

Questions about this episode

What is "GPT 5.5 VS Claude Opus 4.7" about?

In this episode of "GPT 5.5 VS Claude Opus 4.7," the host shares insights from an intensive week of using both AI models in real-world coding scenarios, revealing their performance through detailed benchmarks and personal experiences. While GPT 5.5 shows slight improvements over its predecessor, the host argues that Claude Opus 4.7 outperforms it in critical coding tasks, particularly in…

What is mentioned in this BridgeMind episode?

9 people, works and ideas are mentioned, including Claude Opus 4.7, GPT 5.5, Artificial Analysis, Bridge Mind, Bridge Voice, Design Arena. Each one on this page links to its own page with every episode that mentions it.

How long is "GPT 5.5 VS Claude Opus 4.7"?

The episode runs 24 min; the transcript is about 4,527 words in 41 timestamped sections.

More from BridgeMind

• All analyzed episodes