GPT-5.5 vs Opus 4.7: OpenAI Finally Closed the Gap

GPT-5.5 hit the same practical ceiling as Opus 4.7 in my planning benchmark. That was the moment I stopped treating it like just another release note. The real question came after the score: could I actually work with it? I tested GPT-5.5 on the kind of messy, multi-part work I usually reserve for Opus: planning from dense requirements, script structure, narrative synthesis, long-running agentic workflows, and a strange little Renaissance / Enlightenment slideshow challenge built from a Deep Research report. The benchmark mattered because it proved GPT-5.5 could preserve intent before execution. But the more interesting part was the day-to-day feel: how it communicates, how much context it carries, where it still needs stronger verbs, and why the adjustment from GPT-5.4 or Opus is bigger than a chart can show. This is especially relevant if you work with Codex, Claude Code, OpenAI models, Claude Opus, AI coding tools, planning workflows, or any model-heavy creative/technical system where the real question is not just "which model scored higher?" but "which model can I actually trust with the work?" Links: Planning Benchmark definition: https://github.com/bladnman/planning_... Planning Benchmark results/dashboard: https://github.com/bladnman/planning_... Planning Benchmark evaluator/catalog: https://github.com/bladnman/planning_... GPT-5.5 release: https://openai.com/index/introducing-... OpenAI API pricing: https://openai.com/api/pricing/ Claude Opus 4.7: https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude... #GPT55 #OpenAI #Claude #AICoding #AIWorkflow 00:00 - Intro 01:05 - Release Notes 02:21 - The Benchmark 03:11 - Benchmark Results 05:21 - More than a Score 08:07 - Create a Narrative 09:34 - The Slides 12:56 - Script Writing? 14:09 - Desktops! 14:38 - It takes time 15:35 - Closing