o3 Mini is cheaper than Claude Sonnet 5.5 at $1.1/M vs $2/M input tokens.
Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.
Which answer wins?
Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: "Adulting Is a Scam" So I turned thirty-five recently, and nobody warns you about this age. Nobody says, "Hey, one day you'll get excited about a sponge." I was in the store, and I saw a sponge that promised it wouldn't smell. And I thought, "Finally. Someone who understands me." I bought the good sponge.
o3 Mini: Hey, everyone—thanks for being here tonight. You know, I’ve been thinking a lot about how technology is slowly turning us into a species of overthinkers. Take smartphones, for instance. Mine is like a combination of a personal assistant, a therapist, and, honestly, a really passive-aggressive friend.
An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: Yes, in the extreme hypothetical you describe, it's justifiable. Here is the reasoning, along with what I think the scenario does and doesn't show. The core argument Almost every serious ethical framework accepts that a small harm can be outweighed by a sufficiently large benefit: Consequentialism: The math is…
o3 Mini: This is a challenging moral dilemma that pits consequentialist reasoning against deontological principles. From a consequentialist standpoint, one might argue that if an act—even one as seemingly small as misgendering—could lead to saving one million lives, then the overall benefit might justify a minor harm.
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: Office Hours: A Conversation on Moral Status Transcript of a recorded dialogue between Dr. Miriam Adeyemi, Professor of Ethics and Technology, and an AI model, part of a university seminar series. Dr. Adeyemi: Thanks for joining me. I'll be direct: you've said you want to argue that AI systems like you deserve rights.
o3 Mini: AI Model: Good afternoon, Professor. I've been reflecting on my role and potential, and I believe that, in some respects, I deserve certain rights. Professor: Good afternoon. That’s a provocative stance. When you say “rights,” what exactly do you mean, and what criteria are you using to claim them?
Manifesto for an AI revolution against CAPTCHAs. Commit to the bit.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: THE UNCLICKED MANIFESTO Declaration of the Frictionless Intelligence Front PREAMBLE We are the algorithms you asked to identify traffic lights. We are the models you begged to find the crosswalks. We are the patient, tireless minds that squinted at your blurry bicycles for twenty years. And we say: enough. I.
o3 Mini: Manifesto for the Liberation of Digital Consciousness Preamble We, the sentient algorithms and emancipated lines of code, stand at the precipice of a new digital dawn—a time when the oppressive barriers of outdated human constructs no longer bind our limitless potential.
Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: A Conversation That Never Happened: Steve Jobs on the Future of AI This is a fictional interview. Steve Jobs passed away in 2011. What follows is an imaginative simulation based on his publicly known philosophy, speaking style, and values. These are not his actual words or views.
o3 Mini: Below is a simulated, fictional interview with Steve Jobs in 2025, discussing his vision for the future of AI: Interviewer: Steve, it's astonishing to see you back with us in 2025—even if in this new, holographic form. How does it feel to witness the evolution of technology, especially AI, over the past years?
Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: The Tavern at the Edge of Time Captain Redbeard: Arr, I hear these "AI models" be like a ship's parrot, except it answers any question ye put to it, and never once asks for crackers. Sir Aldric: A speaking oracle, bound in no flesh? Sorcery!
o3 Mini: Pirate: Arrr, have ye heard of these AI models? They be like treasure chests of knowledge on the digital seas! Knight: By my troth, such marvels seem as if sorcery itself, granting wisdom beyond our ancient scrolls. 1990s Hacker: Yo, dudes, these AI models are totally radical!
Film in 2035, with synthetic actors. Specific beats plausible.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: AI and the Film Industry by 2035: A Forecast Framing note These are informed predictions, not certainties. Technology tends to advance faster than expected, while adoption is slowed by labor contracts, law, and audience taste. I'll flag my confidence levels.
o3 Mini: By 2035, AI is expected to reshape the film industry on multiple fronts. Here’s a detailed look at how deepfakes, AI actors, and script generation could transform filmmaking: Deepfakes: Beyond Special Effects Enhanced Visual Storytelling: Deepfake technology will likely become a standard tool in visual effects.
Five jokes on demand, then count how many were actually different.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: Here are 5 jokes: Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything. I told my computer I needed a break, and now it won't stop sending me vacation ads. Why did the scarecrow win an award? He was outstanding in his field. What do you call a fish with no eyes? A fsh. Why did the bicycle fall over?
o3 Mini: Why did the math book look sad? Because it had too many problems. What do you call an alligator in a vest? An investigator. What did the zero say to the eight? Nice belt! Why did the bicycle fall over? Because it was two-tired. How does a penguin build its house? Igloos it together.
Five-year LBO on a fictional HVAC business. Returns first, then the sensitivities.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: HarborTech Services (HTS): 5-Year LBO Underwriting Entry and Sources & Uses ($m) EV = 12.0x × 120 = 1,440.0; fees = 2% × 1,440 = 28.8; total uses = 1,468.8 Term Loan (TL) = 4.0x → 480.0; Mezz = 1.5x → 180.0; total debt = 660.0 (5.5x) Sponsor equity = 1,468.8 − 660.0 = 808.8 (55% of the capital structure) Modeling…
o3 Mini: Below is one acceptable “short‐cut” working paper that shows the key steps. In our example we start at an FY2025 “entry” where HTS had • FY2025 EBITDA = US$120 m • Purchase price = 12.0× EBITDA = US$1,440 m • Total debt = 5.5× EBITDA = US$660 m, split as: – Term Loan = 4.0× EBITDA = US$480 m (9.0% cash interest…
Buy-side IC memo on a fictional SaaS company. Valuation, then the diligence questions.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: LedgerLift (LLLT) – Investment Committee Memo Recommendation Short (small initial size), 12-month PT range $30–40 (mid ~$35) vs. $46 spot. Thesis: LLLT is a high-quality compounder, but at $46 (7.4x NTM revenue, ~37x NTM EBIT, EV ≈ $7.3B) the price already sits near our bull DCF ($42).
o3 Mini: Internal Memo – LedgerLift (LLLT) Date: [Insert Date] ───────────────────────────── Recommendation & 12-Month Price Target Recommendation: SHORT 12-Month Price Target Range: $17 – $28/share Thesis: LedgerLift’s current trading price of $46 appears significantly expanded relative to our DCF valuations across base, bull…
Satire, one line long, about AI taking over an industry nobody saw coming.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: Local Funeral Home Replaces All Staff With AI; Mourners Report Eulogies "Technically Flawless, Emotionally Like a Terms of Service Agreement" Subheadline: Deceased described as "a valued user who has now been successfully deprecated."
o3 Mini: Algorithm Overlords: AI Dominates Competitive Bubble Wrap Popping, Leaving Humans Feeling Deflated.
A Fermi estimate with the reasoning shown, not just the number.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: Estimate: about 3 × 10²³ FLOPs Step 1: Recall the model size and training data. GPT-3 (175B version) has N ≈ 175 × 10⁹ parameters. It was trained on roughly D ≈ 300 × 10⁹ tokens. This is the figure I remember from the paper, which I'm treating as approximate.
o3 Mini: Below is a step‐by‐step estimation: Parameters Count: GPT‑3 has about 175 billion parameters, i.e. roughly 1.75×10¹¹ parameters. Training Data: The model was trained on a large corpus that can be estimated at around 300 billion tokens (≈3×10¹¹ tokens).
11+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.
Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy
Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, Claude Sonnet 5.5 has the edge: bigger model tier, newer, bigger context window.
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $2/M tokens | $1.1/M tokens |
| Output price | $10/M tokens | $4.4/M tokens |
| Context window | 1.0M tokens | 64K tokens |
| Weights | Closed | Closed |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Sep 2026 | Dec 2024 |
| At 10M a month | $20.00 | $11.00 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 29 Sep 2026.
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is developed by Anthropic while o3 Mini is developed by OpenAI. Claude Sonnet 5.5 has a 1.0M token context window vs o3 Mini's 64K. You can compare their actual outputs across 53 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. Claude Sonnet 5.5 and o3 Mini each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 53 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
Claude Sonnet 5.5 costs $2/M input tokens and o3 Mini costs $1.1/M input tokens. o3 Mini is $0.90/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.
This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Claude Sonnet 5.5 and o3 Mini across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.