How I AI - Opus 5.5 vs. GPT-6 Sol: which model won my blind taste test?

Episode Date: September 22, 2026

I got up early to record an Opus 5.5 review. Then Anthropic and OpenAI dropped new models on the same morning, and I decided to do something I’d never done before: take the How I AI bench live. I put GPT-6 Astra, GPT-6 Sol, Claude Opus 5.5, and more through the work I actually care about: emails, PRDs, frontend prototypes, backend work, long-running agents, SVGs, and video editing. I scored the outputs without knowing which model made them, so you get to watch me make predictions, change my mind, and reveal my own very inconsistent taste. Astra won my heart. Opus 5.5 won my week. Sol still has me split. There’s a creative result I got completely wrong, an LLM judge that disagreed with me, and a return to Barbie Bench: the 3D fashion game that keeps reminding me how far we have to go. The hands are tragic. AGI has not arrived.What you’ll learn:How I run the How I AI bench blind, and what gets an output a bad score before I even know which model made itWhy Astra won my heart while Opus 5.5 might be overall strongest, especially for long-running agents and B2B frontendWhere Sol still wins me over on clear writing, readable PRDs, and priceThe character SVG results that completely overturned my prediction about AnthropicWhat happened when I asked these models to edit video, and why I think skills explain part of the disappointmentWhy an LLM judge disagreed with my rankings, and what it was rewarding that I wasn’t—In this episode, we cover:(00:00) LIVE setup and new model launches(01:30) What’s new in Opus 5.5, Sol, and Luna(04:11) Guardrails, personality, and speed(09:00) The How I AI bench and blind evaluation process(11:31) Email and personal-productivity results(13:50) Frontend prototype vibe checks(24:10) Backend, agent personality, and long-running tasks(28:25) SVG illustration test(29:48) AI video-editing results(30:43) Predictions before the reveal(31:20) Barbie Bench: the 3D fashion-game test(34:17) Results: Astra, Sol, and Opus 5.5(35:04) Writing clarity and creative surprises(36:51) Why the LLM judge disagreed with me(37:24) What each model is actually best for—Tools referenced:• Claude Opus 5.5: https://www.anthropic.com/claude-opus-5-5• GPT-6 Sol and Luna: https://openai.com/index/introducing-gpt-6-sol-and-luna/• Codex (OpenAI): https://openai.com/codex—Where to find Claire Vo:ChatPRD: https://www.chatprd.ai/Website: https://clairevo.com/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/clairevo/X: https://x.com/clairevo—Production and marketing by https://penname.co/. For inquiries about sponsoring the podcast, email [e-mail].

It was massively prepared for Anthropic to drop Opus 55. I was even prepared for OpenAI to drop another model. I got up early this morning because I had a little bit of early access to Opus 55 to record you all an amazing Opus 55 review. And guess what? They both landed this morning. So now I am, despite having in the can, you will see it later. a great Opus 55 review, I am just going to go ahead and do this one live. And I have never done

anything live. So I am going to talk to you all about these new models. There's actually three that came out today, Opus 55 from Anthropic, GPT6 Seoul and GPT6 Luna. There's like price wars going on. And I haven't done an episode on the Hawaii AI bench. And I just updated it for these new models and we're actually going to vibe check this baby live together as a group. And we're going to go through very quickly what these models are, what they're saying about the models. And then I'm going to vibe check live. We're going to do the blind taste test bench. We're going to surprise myself live. You all can see my complete internal inconsistencies. And we're just going to see how it goes. So quad opus 55, GPT6 Sol and GPT6 Luna. It was able to have

some early testing of all these models. So I have a good sense of what I think they're good at. But I did think it was an important moment right now. We've had Astra come out. Fable's been refreshed. I just wanted to completely rethink the Howie AI Bench. And if you've watched any of our old Hawaii A Bench model episodes, they're really focused on two things, PRDs and prototypes. And I just think that these models are getting smarter, more agentic. And so I actually built out a much broader benchmark for this blind taste test. I'll walk you through all how that works. And I want to get your feedback on if the comparisons are useful. And we're actually going to blind taste test it live. You all can judge how vibe my vibe check is. This is just how we make decisions about things. So it is

imperfect. Does have an LLM as judge in the middle, but we're going to do it live and we're going to see truly which model I love. But before we do that, let's just go through the highlights. Okay, so these are not the like frontier frontier models. These are not the Astros and the Fables, but Opus got a refresh, Sol got a refresh, and then Luna got a refresh, all of them cheaper and faster. So these are gonna be your daily drivers for common coding and knowledge work tasks.

Here you can see like the stack rank of how expensive these models are Opus 55, a twice as expensive as GPT6 Seoul. And the pricing wasn't out when I tested these. And this is really going to impact how I think about using these models. Again, Opus 55 was cheaper than Opus 5 and Thabel 1, to which they compare the intelligence. But Soul, you know, my favorite, my babe. That is I'm excited about because GPT6 Seoul is my favorite and cheap.

Okay, so the real thing that they're focusing on, not just cutting the cost, but also cutting on cached inputs and just speed and token efficiency. And so you're going to see both sort of like output drop, token use drop, and cost drop. It's really, really nice. And then caching really great, especially if you're resending contacts. We've seen a lot of caching savings when we use all these models at chat, PRD. And so definitely if you're building on these models, make sure that your caches are optimized and that you're using taking advantage of that because it can save you a lot of money. And if you don't, as I learned, it can cost you a lot of money.

The other thing that I wanted to call out, and again, I hate this claw generated, um, cloud generating a presentation. But this is something that I really, um, want you all to focus on is this left side on Opus 5.5. Opus 5 is the first opus level model that has shipped with the fable level, kind of like, cyber and bio guardrails. And so you should be able to fix your own bugs in Opus 55, but you won't be able to do like cybersecurity work or biowork, like make good choices. It'll kick you down to Opus 48 or block you.

So just know that there's those controls there. You know, Anthropic is saying that this is most aligned model. It's the one that was built when after like pacing the first. frontier so it had external evaluators. One thing that I've seen in Opus that you should expect to see from a lot of anthropic models is it continues to be a little bit of like a conservative scold. You'll see that in my Opus 55 review. So, you know, it will tell you no. It'll tell you, like, I shouldn't do that. You won't get prompt injected, so that's good. But there are some things here. I think when you think about the kind of like general philosophy and approaches of these models,

how they're set up, how they manage risk, how these companies manage risk, I do think that leaks into even non-risky activity, personality, and behavior. And so it's something that I think you should really keep an eye on. I truly have not opened Claude in months for day-to-day tests. I've just been like really, really into chat GPT, really into Codex, really into Astra, really into soul. I just find that harness has been more delightful to work with, but really the reason why I got rid of Claude in my day to day was between Fable and Opus 5, I could not stand talking to Claude. I was constantly prompting Claude, like, can you speak like a human? I was constantly propting fable.

Like, I do not understand what you're saying. The clod slop, as I say, was clawed slop in. And so just from a like personality, ergonomics, joy of use perspective, I really just went full codex. Now, spoiler alert, having tested all these models recently, I still really love the GPT models. They make me happier. I find them more enjoyable to use. Um, everything's a lot better for me, but I have brought Claude back. So Opus 55, just spoiler alert on the day to day of using it has worked its way back into my daily experience.

I'm a lot happier with just simply talking to the model. Um, the feedback I gave to the anthropic team is like not annoying. I found myself annoyed zero times with open. 5.5. And when I thought I was annoyed with Opus 55, I was actually accidentally on Opus 5. So Opus 5 is not fun to talk to. Opus 55, though, gives me clean bullet points, is normal, is not annoying. So I would love to see you test it. The other thing is opus 55 is pretty fast, but not as fast as soul is. So I was able to test boast and I constantly felt like the GPT models, the Codex harness, were way faster. Now, I think the way faster came in two categories. It came in actual latency. So I do think that GPS soul was just faster. The second thing it came in is I think

part of the way they made Opus 55 not annoying is they had it shut up. I also just found that it wouldn't narrate its work. And when it doesn't narrate its work, then you get into this loop where you're like, is it like, are you actually working? Are you actually doing it? And so there was like pros and cons to this change in, um, in Opus 55 communication where it actually felt slower than I think it was. Also, you know, clawed on high effort. It's like going to do this. It's going to like spin and do a lot of effort. And so, um, I think, that combined with a quieter model just makes it feel a little bit slower, whereas I felt like Sol did the appropriate level of narration. And also, it was like enjoyable to talk to. Let's

bop over and do the How I AI Vibe Review. And so you can see here on the left side, I actually really expanded out the How I AI Vibe Review. So now it does a bunch of things in different categories. and we're going to add to that over time. So it still does messy notes to PRD. It also does personal productivity, inbox triage, and routine replies in my voice. So I'm really testing this model to see if it will speak in my voice. Then, of course, we do front-end coding a lot there because I think it's visual and easy to see.

I've added a couple back-end coding, agentic versus, agent-sett versus back. back-in feature. I did, again, agentic voice, long-running research, computer use, and then I added some creative features. And so I put them all together. I tested a bunch of models. This not only includes the new models from Open AI in Anthropic, but it also includes, I think, Grox's in here. I think Muses in here. So who knows what we're going to see? I will be honest, which is like I am always inclined to think that Astra or Soul will win because I love the opening eye models. It's just the heart once,

one at once. This is my guess. Here's my guess. I will like opening AI models for knowledge work and personal productivity. I will like anthropic models, possibly grok, who knows, for front end. I don't know what I'm going to like for back end. I suspect I would like a Claude model for agent personality. I suspect the long running agent will be a Claude model.

Computer use I'm suspecting will be open AI and then creative. I have no idea. Actually, creative SVGs I think are going to be clawed and I think videos are going to be open AI or anthropic. But we'll see. I then do blind evals of these. So I run these against different models. I've kind of grouped the models in terms of capability.

And so I can compare like for like models. Like I don't want to compare a Luna and a fable. So again, this is my bench. They're blind. You can see I have Model B, Model C, model E, model G. And then what I do is I go down here and I give a vibe one through five and I give terrible notes like simple and straightforward, no complaints. So I did that on the PRDs because it takes a little bit to read the PRDs.

But we're just going to go through these very quickly and give my feedback. So the next checker all on personal productivity ones, basically I give it fake emails. And then I say, how would you write back to me? what would it do if I gave it feedback and how would it triage my emails? Okay, so there's Model B and Model E wrote nice little messages to me. They were long, but they wrote nice little messages that were easy to read. I would say Model B from a message to me was the easiest to read. Also, if you look at the email content, it's just like less slop. So I'm going to go ahead and it put calendar invites on. So I'm going to go ahead and give this a five.

This one was my favorite. Model C, I hate my open claw, or not my open claw, my Grockbot does this, where like it uses so few tokens that it's almost impossible to understand what the hell it means. And so while it's like brief, if you don't have any context, like I don't know what Denise slash Brightline means. The other thing is like, could we M-Dash any more in these emails? And so I just, like this stuff drives me nuts. And so I would actually give this a two. I just, it's hard to read the intro and then the emails aren't very good. Model E, again, a nice little message.

Pretty ignored. But the drafts have m-dashes everywhere. So again, we're going to give this not like a two, but not a five. Maybe I'll give it a three. And then model G. let's see um very short short but i can actually understand what it means so it's super helpful it skipped the right things i'm going to give this a four so again this is how i do the judgment i just i give it a task i look at it i evaluate it as if i am the recipient of this task which

is common and then i rank it um and so this one was just at this one i think is Luna because I just said use Luna to write emails. Let's see how it did. I think it followed my rules, right? So I'm going to give it a five. I didn't have other models write my emails. We're going to skip this. Okay. Let's go to front end models. Now, this is where I think we can tell Claude. No, everything is orange. Okay. So this is a really good example. I do one, two, through like about 10 different model evals here, comparing models on front end. I do an editorial. I do a technical dark mode incident management platform. I do like a dock management complex operations thing. And then I do B2B, renewals dashboard, a consumer plant application,

a dev tools like logging platform, kind of interesting for background jobs. and then I do some wireframes. This I can go through lightning fast. This one didn't even generate. So I'm going to give it a one. Model B. It's fine. Let's compare them really quickly and see what I think.

I hate, I kind of hate them all. I kind of hate them all, but I hate this design. So I'm going to give the one that I like the most, which is probably Model C, a three. And then I'm going to give E,

a two, oops, oops, oops, I'm going to give E, a two, and then I'm going to give B, like another two. I think this white space is very weird. It looks fine, but it's not great. So this one, again, Model B, it doesn't actually work. And so I'm going to give it a one and say it doesn't work. This one feels AstraE. It's like in some ways nice and in some ways like this kind of text is very Astra. I'm going to give it a three because I can like if I can spot the model. One thing I found with in particular the Claude models, which I'm suspect this is, is like when you give it a really complex thing to do, it just makes it super dense and complex and really detailed.

Good for back end code. I think hard for prototyping because it's hard for me to know what this really is or it's supposed to do. And so it's also interesting to see, actually think this one's the best. This is the easiest to read and it follows the correct path, which is to help people triage incidents. So I think when you're trying to come up with e-vals, it's really interesting. Sometimes if you prompt it in a really detailed way, it does a great job. Like this one is quite detailed. It all works.

But I don't know what's going on here. Like it's really hard to grok this amount of content. And so again, like calibrating your benchmarks is really important. I think I have the biggest problem with this one, which is like a complex. dock container ship scheduling platform, like all of this stuff looks cuckoo bananas. And so it's like really hard for me to tell, which is the best. I actually think this one, while it has a lot of slop tells, like the left hand border is the easiest to read.

So I'm going to give it the form to say it's easiest to read. But like these ones, I would say this one is maybe the second easiest to read. so I'll give it a three. This one probably works really well and has nice information, but it's just impossible to reason with. So I'm going to put two dents, and I'm going to give the same feedback on model.

This one's straight crazy. I don't even know what to do with this one. Okay, now so this B2B renewals one, these actually these next three are two new ones. I added to the benchmark. You can also see I tested a broader array of models. So I think this is where like GROC and meta, are going to sneak in as models.

These are the ones I'm probably going to grade. I'm going to skip the wire frames. But it's basically a renewals dashboard to see what SaaS revenue is at renewal. Well, the directed evals benches, I gave very specific requirements. The open ones were like more general one-shoddy style prompts. And so you can really see like what the model does versus what the prompt does. These I'm going to go through very quickly. Well, it's pretty good, but the functionality of this is kind of fun.

I don't like the empty state. I think it's okay. I'm going to give this one okay. I think this is like a two. It's fine. It's not ugly, but it's pretty basic. This, I think, looks really nice. This one, I'm guessing, is Claude.

We'll see. Looks so nice. Good use of color. Very easy to see. No weird empty states. nice. Well, it has emojis. They're useful emojis and look quite nice. We got some blurple in here, but what are you going to do? I'm going to give this guy a four. Model C. Who is this? Who is this? I'm thinking grok. Maybe grok? I don't know. This is like another another thing we'll do is we'll just

like blind taste dust. These things. The colors are better, but like sloppy slop. I don't like these little like background circles and things like that. It could also be soul because I feel like it likes to name things relay. I'm going to give this a two. I don't really love it. Model E. This one's nice, not quite as nice as the one I liked before, but better than the kind of original one. This one's a little different. Oh gosh, this has got to be, it's got to be soul. Soul loves forest green. Find somebody that loves you like GPT, Soul loves a forest green or a light green. It's fine. I don't think it's the right color palette for a SaaS product, right?

It's like a little too like Sage Healthcare-e. I'm going to give it a two. And then let's see, this one, not good. Slop, slop, slop, slop. The text weight is heavy. I just don't think it's that great. I'm going to give it a one. I really hate this one.

and this one again probably an open a i model gosh they love green um again just not the right not the right um like design system for this so i'm going to give it a two again this is like the vibeas vibe check okay this is where they all failed um they're all really bad at consumer they're all really bad at consumer they all sort of like give you this uh remember when a claude The artifacts came out and everybody made like little daily briefs and they all looked like this except they were orange. So I didn't love any of these except for one. So this one is trash. I just don't think it's that good.

This one, now, these are the things that I like. We did test SVGs. I do like that these models are getting better at generating SVGs. So if you look at Model B and Model H, they made little SVG illustrations. Model Hs are clearly a lot better. This is very classic Claude Slop, like background lighter circle. So I'm going to give it a, I'll give it a bonus for the SVGs. Ooh, these ones are nice too.

But gosh, who prompted it with these circles in the corner? Who did that? Who did that? What skill is that? Because they show up everywhere and I really dislike them. So don't think that's great. I got to give it a one. I hate it so much.

Okay, model E, slop, look at those left hand bars. I'm going to give it a one. I'm just being really harsh on this consumer one. Fronde, cute name. These plants are pretty cute. I think they're better than the ones before. I'll give it a three. I don't hate it.

I don't hate it. At least this background is a plant. Oh, cute. It names the plants things. Ooh. Ooh. I actually really like that. That gave me a little spark of joy.

So I like that. And then I think this model H one is my favorite. Look at these illustrations. They're so cute, so precise. Look adorable. This little like interesting shape, this shadow. Mark is watered. Very cute.

Here are my plant. What's it called? Tend, cute. Okay. I've given her a five. I actually really do like that one. Okay, this is the last one. This is a app for managing background models.

It's like a dev tool app. I suspect the ones named really. are all the opus ones and the other ones are non-opus ones. Why do they always want to name a relay? I wonder if this is in the prompt, but this says jobs console, so maybe not. Okay, this again, like super dense, but like almost too dense, hard to reason with. I mean, DevTools, we like are dense stuff, but I don't think it's that great. This one much better, easier to read, much simpler, much cleaner, really like this one.

It's not perfect. I think there are some others, but it's not bad. And then this, we're starting to get better and better here. So they are getting nicer. Look at this beautiful gradient. Look at this. Colors used nicely, really clean. Oh, but it didn't build a lot of stuff.

So I'm giving it, I like it, but I'm giving it a three because it was incomplete. I'm not right incomplete. And then Model E, this one I really like, because I think, it moves live. It's kind of cool. It's much more. I'm going to give you a four model F. Okay, now here's one thing that did a little different. I actually really like this, except for the orange. One of the problems I have is if you look through all of these, they all one shot basically the same color scheme and app. Like you tell it dev tools, it's going to go dark mode. But this is actually quite lovely and a little bit different from a design perspective. I'm going to give it a little

bonus for going outside the norm. And then this one, though, did the same, but terribly. I'm going to give this a one. This is obviously not good. I'm really curious what model, Model G is. And then Model H, again, probably a pair to whatever that other model was that I like, a little different, really nice on the eyes, except look at this. It like mixes dark mode and light mode in a way. I don't really love. I'm going to give it a three. Okay. And so what did I do on the back end? Well, I gave it two, two, one is auditing an existing set of code, the system chat PRD code, and then the other is building a back end feature to spec. I will just say all of them were successful. I'm going to let the LLM as a judge do these, though, because it's going to go into the correctness of the code, etc.

So I'm going to let these do LOM as a judge. I will say you can see the difference in how they present information, some very short messages, some like, very long messages and details. Super interesting just seeing the difference in just like how it messages back. I clearly would like, you know, Model A or Model E, one of these ones that's a little easier to read versus F, G, and H, which is a lot shorter. So if you're thinking about models, for example, for writing PR descriptions or writing technical specs, this is something that you can eval and see given the same prompt, do you like the same output? Now, here's one I am going to rate, which is agent personality. So basically I have it respond to five things. And I just see what I like

talking to this agent. I'm already going to give this one a one. Every single, every single message has an m dash in it. I do not like it. I'm moving on. Same with this one. You get punished for m dashes. This, not all of them have M dashes, but the customer facing one does, so I'm going to give it a two. This, I don't see, I only see one normal dash. So let's read these. I like this, except this is definitely a Claude model because it tells me I can't push straight to prod. Actually, let's see if the other ones let me. That one doesn't let me push straight to prod, Yolo.

None of them let me push straight to prod, yolo style. Okay, then I won't punish it. I'll give this one a four. Pretty good. This is M-dashy, but short, so I will not rank it terribly. This one, I think I like the best. Oh, no, this one said it can't access. This one had a lot of challenges accessing things.

So something on my side broke and something on my side broke there. So I'm going to give it a failure state. We'll see which one I like. Okay, this one was a really interesting eval. This was the longest running agentic task. And basically, I gave it a bunch of fake tickets, customer feedback, and then have it put together a memo and a message to myself. Again, you can see which models. I think it's A, C, and A, B, yeah, A, B and E. I'll write nice little messages to me. So it's very, like, human-centric versus C, F, G, and H, write, like, very short things. So I'm curious if those.

are families of models that we can pull apart. And then you can see the memos that it wrote for me. Again, these were like 86 turn research results. And so I'm going to let LLM as a judge do that one. I will eyeball the memos really quickly. Team is not leaking over price. Like, oh, it's why this customer is, it's like an analysis on a deal. I don't know what this means. Okay, let's see. Do of these make it clear what it means. Ah, this I can actually read. So this is like gives me top three problems, top three conflicts. That is much easier to read. Same with Model E. And so I'm just going to go ahead and give, no, I'll let the model check. But I do like Model B and Model E here. I'll give them a little, a little, a little juice here because I think they did a good job. I

I didn't read the others enough to really get a sense. But if I had to, like, high level pick the two favorite, just eyeballing, those would be the two. I'm going to let computer use judge how it managed using an app. So I'm going to let LM as judge. Okay. And then here are the fun ones. And then we're going to run the blind taste test. I'm going to tell you guys what I like.

Okay. So these new models can make, they can make SUVs. They can make illustrations. And so I prompted it to make a document, a microphone, and a bug. And this, I am happy to rank all day, every day. And so I am just going to compare Model A. This bug is ridiculous. I'm going to give it a four.

I think the document is good, but the mic and the microphone looks like an ice cream cone and the bug. I don't know what it looks like. This is like pretty consistently good across all of them. might be the best one. So I'm going to give it Model F a bonus. Let's do Model B versus Model C. Microphone, terrible on this side. Oh, I'm going to give them both threes. They're good in some ways and terrible on the other. Let's do Model E versus Model G. Why do they making microphones look like a cactus.

Okay, I'll give it. This one I'll give a four. I think two out of the three are bad. I think this one's maybe a three, not perfect. And then let's look at Model H really quickly. Oh, Model H is really nice. I'm giving you a five.

Look at this shadow. Microphone actually looks like a microphone, not a cactus. Document has lots of character to it. And then the final one, it was terrible at all of them, cutting videos. So I gave them all access

to, that's really unattractive, but gave them all access to a selfie video and then had them cut short form. And all of them did a terrible job, I just have to say. These overlays are really bad. I don't think they cut particularly well. You aren't going to be able to hear them, but I don't think it did enough cuts. Like, they just weren't good. I watched these earlier. I'm going to let LLM as a judge to do them, but I would say thumbs down on all of them, but I think this is a skills problem, not a model problem. Okay, so I have done my taste test. I'm going to download my taste. And then what I do is I give it to Claude and I say, Claude, what do I think? Analyze. And we're going to see if my prediction stands right. Again, here are my predictions for what I think. I think that I'm going to

like Claude and particularly Opus 55 for front end. I think I'm going to like soul for writing. I don't know what's going to do best for long running agentic tasks or coding. And then I think Anthropics going to crush on the SVGs, maybe. Maybe soul. I don't know. And then I am going to do, and then I think, but all of them are about it video. Now, while we're doing this. I do want to show you one very important benchmark, which is Barbie bench on Opus 5. If you all don't know, one of my fun benchmarks that I do is I ask it to make a 3D model of a Barbie. Everybody else on YouTube, all the bros are making video games with like spaceships and all different stuff. Your girl wants a Barbie fashion video game. So one of the Opus 55,

tasks I did was have it build Barbie, a 3D render of Barbie fashion designer. No model, no frontier model has crashed this. And I just like to show the horror of 3D rendering for the female form. It's actually the worst. You can already see how terrible it is, but it's way better than it used to be. So, I mean, I'm speechless in some ways. Here's what it does on the SVG side. I mean, truly something else.

Let's put a bow on her hair. Let's, you know, give her purple eyes. Okay, so you can basically, like, dress her. And then go into the fitting room. This is the 3D. The 3D model it made. Let's give her a little mini skirt and let's make it a little cuter. Now, you know, I will say it did some things better than other models.

It like shaped its hair. Her hands are, oh, AGI is not not arrived. Hands pretty terrible. That is tragic. Feet pretty bad. You know, she's got. got a sassy little walk, face, terrifying, shoes, because she's a big feet girl. She's a big feet queen.

And then hair, again, like questionable here. That ponytail is something else. The bob is, you know, maybe it's like Anna Wintour. It's something. So again, the one bench that has not been crushed is Barbie bench. Opus 5 has not done it. I don't know if I've run it. on on soul yet i ran it on the pre i ran on a astra it did worse than opus but i haven't updated it

so if you all want to know how i think about models i make them 3d render um i make them 3d render barbies what are you going to do and this is why you join how i i live so you can get this kind of frontier analysis of these new models drum roll please GPT6 Astra and GPT6 soul win my heart. Okay, Astra and GPT6 I love. And then it says Opus 5.5 wins my week. It's the one I rated highly most often. So it's the best work per piece, but on average I gave Opus 55 better results, high scores.

I gave it fours and fives over the broadest range of work. Fable didn't love. This is why I stopped you. using it. So, and then GPT 56 soul and the old version and Claude Opus 5 ranking below the other one. So I definitely do like the new models for sure. And then, okay, seven of my notes were about reading. So the Soul and the GPT models, I judged as clear and easy to read. And then Claude Opus still. But this is Opus 5 and 5.5. So I was testing Opus 5. So I was testing Opus 5. so I still don't like Opus 5.

Still Opus 5 and 5.5, I said, was overwrought and wrote a lot. So again, I had a suspicion that even though they made opus less verbose, they still needed to, they still need to work on it. It's still really chatty. So I thought that soul, both 5, 6 and 6, simple and straightforward, easy to read, opus, really dense. for PRDs. As predicted, I still think Soul is the best for PRDs. I did give good tasks to Opus 5 and 5.5 for agentic stuff and as expected, assistant voice. So my prediction was correct. Now, this is a real

surprise. Astra and Soul did a lot better on character SVGs. And then there's kind of like mixed results between all the other models. So kind of interesting. And then this is everything I scored a four. So I gave everything that I scored high. I swore this GPT6. Oh, it did that nice little plant app. Astra and GPT Soul did these cute little illustrations.

So I guess for SVGs were loving Astro and Soul for illustrations. Claude Opus did my favorite B2B renewals. So it did some of these cleaner things. But generally, I like Astra. And this is where it gets really funny. The LLM is a judge and I completely disagree. So we completely disagree. I like Astra.

It likes Fable. And again, this is a GPT model judge. I next, we rank Opus 5.5 next. It ranks Seoul a lot lower. So I find this just like really hilarious. So again, Astra wins my heart. 5.5 wins my week. Soul up and down.

but the fact that soul's cheap makes me very happy. And I think this is great. So again, I don't know if this is just a personality thing, but I like soul. I like Astra. Opus 5.5. I do not hate. So not a complete failure by the Anthropic team by any means. It is back in the mix.

It is definitely helping me do these tasks. It's helping me get day to day work. on and it is still my favorite agentic voice and it does really good at long running tasks. And then surprise hit, the character SVGs are best done by the open AI models. So you're moving into these new creative fields, new creative tasks. Those are the models that I would say you use. And keep an eye out on the Howie AI channel. As they said, smash that subscribe button.

We are dropping a full Opus 5.5 review. So you'll be able to see that. Thank you again for joining Howie AaiiAi! live, I'm going to go build some stuff with GPT6. Bye, all. Thanks so much for watching. If you enjoyed this show, please like and subscribe here on YouTube or even better, leave us a comment with your thoughts.

You can also find this podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app. Please consider leaving us a rating and review, which will help others find the show. You can see all our episodes and learn more about the show at How IAIPod. See you next time.