Claude · Last 7 days

Claude Sonnet 5.5

0–100 · higher means more positive community experience, not benchmark performance.

Updated 2026-10-02 15:52 UTC · 2026-09-25 – 2026-10-02 UTC
All-platform score66.3/100122 comments in 7 days

What people think

One user added a mini router that dispatches harder coding slices to Sonnet 5.5, and the setup improved first-pass implementation quality. One user, after briefly reviewing Claude Sonnet 5.5's Thomson problem proof, sarcastically said anyone who finds inspiration from it should just become a computer.

About the sample and scores

As of 2026-10-02 15:52:03 UTC, Claude Sonnet 5.5 in the Claude family has 122 explicitly attributed community comments in the last 7 days; its community score is 66.3/100. Available category scores include General text 66.2/100 (n=59); Coding 76.4/100 (n=9); Reasoning 66.2/100 (n=26). Scoring method and sources

RECENT EXPERIENCE

How the Experience Index is changing

Not enough historyvs 7 days ago · points

30 days of rolling 7-day scores at each daily snapshot. The vertical scale adapts to the data. Missing or insufficient samples leave gaps; today is still updating.

Tap or use ← → for dates, scores and sample sizes. Blank dates have insufficient data.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 · Zhihu · 30 days of rolling 7-day experience scores 40506070 Observed-day mean: 60.9 2026-09-29 · 62.5 · n=39 · 2026-09-22T23:57:03+00:00 – 2026-09-29T23:57:03+00:002026-09-30 · 59.9 · n=47 · 2026-09-23T23:57:03+00:00 – 2026-09-30T23:57:03+00:002026-10-01 · 60.4 · n=50 · 2026-09-24T23:57:02+00:00 – 2026-10-01T23:57:02+00:002026-10-02 · 60.9 · n=51 · 2026-09-25T15:52:03+00:00 – 2026-10-02T15:52:03+00:00 60.9 09-0309-1109-1809-2510-02 Claude Sonnet 5.5 · Zhihu · 30 days of rolling 7-day experience scores 40506070 Observed-day mean: 60.9 2026-09-29 · 62.5 · n=39 · 2026-09-22T23:57:03+00:00 – 2026-09-29T23:57:03+00:002026-09-30 · 59.9 · n=47 · 2026-09-23T23:57:03+00:00 – 2026-09-30T23:57:03+00:002026-10-01 · 60.4 · n=50 · 2026-09-24T23:57:02+00:00 – 2026-10-01T23:57:02+00:002026-10-02 · 60.9 · n=51 · 2026-09-25T15:52:03+00:00 – 2026-10-02T15:52:03+00:00 60.9 09-0309-1109-1809-2510-02
Daily readings & sample sizes
DateScorenScoring window (UTC)
2026-10-0260.9512026-09-25T15:52:03+00:00 – 2026-10-02T15:52:03+00:00
2026-10-0160.4502026-09-24T23:57:02+00:00 – 2026-10-01T23:57:02+00:00
2026-09-3059.9472026-09-23T23:57:03+00:00 – 2026-09-30T23:57:03+00:00
2026-09-2962.5392026-09-22T23:57:03+00:00 – 2026-09-29T23:57:03+00:00

Zhihu · 60.9 · 51 scored comments · Read platform reviews →

ONE MODEL, DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES

Across the communities

Last 7 days

Scored separately for each platform, with different samples and audiences. Platform scores are not simply averaged; scored counts exclude quota-only comments.

Scores range from 0 to 100. Select a platform for its trend and reviews. Latest opinion time is not crawler health.

Community reviews

Selected comments from the last 7 days. The balance of excerpts does not represent the share of positive reviews.

7 selected excerpts

Community reports about limits cannot establish official allowances.

NegativeGeneral text

“Anyone who can get inspiration from this should go be a computer”

Machine translated
Show original

能在这里面产生灵感的可以当计算机去了

Comment context
Original answer ↗

Some responses claim this is Anthropic's excessive promotion, but I feel I need to stand up for Anthropic. The reason is simple—this is not Anthropic's release at all... The original message was from a company doing various LLM benchmarks called Vals.AI. Here is the original text: We asked ten Claude Sonnet 5.5 agents to use Lean to prove the lowest-energy arrangement of seven electrons on a sphere (the Thomson problem, with N=7). Within 15 hours, they produced a 17,895-line proof, accepted by the Lean kernel, showing that the answer is a pentagonal bipyramid.

Machine translated
Show original

有些回答说这是anthropic的过度宣传,我觉得我得为anthropic站一下台。理由很简单,这根本不是anthropic发的…… 原消息是一家做各种LLM Benchmark的公司Vals.AI发的,这是原文: We asked ten Claude Sonnet 5.5 agents to use Lean to prove the lowest-energy arrangement of seven electrons on a sphere (the Thomson problem, with N=7). Within 15 hours, they produced a 17,895-line proof, accepted by the Lean kernel, showing that the answer is a pentagonal bipyramid.

NegativeGeneral text

“This thing is inferior to Opus 5.5 in every way, and it's also learned the essence of how domestic small-parameter exam-prep model makers inflate their scores with flashy 'thundering deep thinking'.”

Machine translated
Show original

这玩意儿哪里都不如Opus 5.5,也是给A畜学到国产小参数做题家模型雷霆大思考刷分的精髓了

NegativeReasoning

“Relying on unlimited extended thinking to achieve so-called higher intelligence feels like it might not be the right direction.”

Machine translated
Show original

依靠无限制拉长思考来换取所谓的更高智商,感觉可能不是正确方向

NegativeReasoning

“Follow up, found hallucinations”

Machine translated
Show original

追问,发现有幻觉

Comment context
From the same comment ↗

I discussed a JEV-related question and found that Company A's models now have a certain characteristic.

Machine translated
Show original

我拿一个跟JEV相关的问题讨论了一下,发现A家的模型现在有个特点。

NegativeUsage limits

“Company A's account is "delicate" — every now and then it completely blocks your mainland China IP.”

Machine translated
Show original

A社的账号"娇贵"啊,隔三岔五给你大陆ip全干挺了

NegativeSpeed & latency

“Thinking uses more tokens, making it slower”

Machine translated
Show original

思考用更多token导致更慢

NegativeSpeed & latency

“In the same thinking tier, Sonnet 5.5 consumes more tokens and is less efficient than Opus”

Machine translated
Show original

同思考档位的sonnet 5.5 比 opus 消耗token更多,效率更低

How's your AI experience today?