Skip to content
Work with meSpeakingInsightsAbout Book a call

Claude Opus 5.5 Is the Best Model (For Now!) I’ve Ever Used

Two kites, one pink and one blue, lie crumpled and soaked in the surf on a sunny beach, their strings trailing across the wet sand. Behind them, a man in a white linen shirt stands barefoot in the shallows, flying a third kite, bright green, high in a clear blue sky.

Reader note: I’ve been on vacation this week (yeah, Oktoberfest!) but I wanted to send out this very short and quick take on the new Opus 5.5.

For weeks I’ve been trying to get a PowerPoint presentation right with AI. I worked on it with GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 - both on the ‘max’ setting. Neither one got the story right. The structure was off, the headlines and slide content didn’t hold together, and candidly, the slides just weren’t interesting to look at. Nothing either model gave me came close to what I normally build by hand.

Last week on Tuesday, Anthropic released Claude Opus 5.5. I’ve been on vacation all week (flying home now), but I couldn’t leave it alone when I had a few minutes between activities. I gave it the presentation I was in the middle of, some direction and a structure, and said go.

To say I was blown away would be an understatement. I don’t think I’ve said that about any other model. As good as Fable 5 and then Fable 5.1 was - for the kind of work that I do, Opus 5.5 is just in a different league. I put the best versions of the presentations that Astra and Fable and Opus 5.5 created next to each other and showed them to a friend who’s traveling with me. He was as struck by the gap as I was.

So, full stop, this is the best model I’ve ever used. Astra is great at a lot of things. Fable 5.1 is amazing at many things. Opus 5.5 is better.

The writing is what I noticed first. They fixed it. Finally! You all know I write every day. I use these tools to think through an idea and help with my structure, and when I get stuck on a sentence or two I’ll ask for help. Opus 4.5 and 4.6 were the first models that really impressed me there. When they were released, no other model was even close to the writing style those models could achieve. Then 4.7 came out, and 4.8, and 5, and for me the writing didn’t move. Some days I thought it went a little backwards, which was strange to watch after how good 4.6 had been. Opus 5.5 moved it again. The style and the tone feel right. It follows direction incredibly well. It really feel like it understands the nuance of what I want to say.

It’s also fast. Really fast. And I’ve been running it on the Medium setting the whole time, which is new for me. I used to put everything on Max because I always wanted the best thinking. On 5.5 I’m getting great results on Medium and getting them quickly. For final polish I’m running things on the Max settings - but for my day-to-day use I’m going to run things on Medium effort.

Just for fun (and because my wife loves legos and cats), I asked it to design a two-foot-tall white Lego Maine Coon cat. The full design, a video of it being assembled, a parts book so I could order every piece, and an assembly guide. It did all of it. It was wild. Here’s the animation it created.

Lego Cat Design

For the lawyers reading this. In its launch post, Anthropic had the model write reports using only what it could find online, and failed any report with a made-up figure or quote. Opus 5.5 passed 16 of 18. The two models before it passed none. A massive upgrade. Now that’s Anthropic grading its own homework, so take it with a grain of salt. But made-up facts are what keep managing partners up at night, and it’s the first number in a launch post in a while that made me look twice. As I say in ever training I do - you still have to verify all of the output from AI. You have a bar number, Claude does not.

OpenAI launched GPT-6 Sol and GPT-6 Luna the same day. I haven’t opened either one yet and the reviews I’ve read are mixed. I’ll look when I’m home.

I want to end this by sharing two slides from the deck I’m working on. Claude created both of these for a training session I’m delivering next week (my content and ideas, it did the design). I am absolutely blown away by what it can do.

Slide from the training deck, titled Seventy years of slow, then four years of fast. A thin timeline from 1950 to the 2020s marks 1956, a summer workshop at Dartmouth names the field; the 1980s, expert systems with rules written by hand; the 2000s, machine learning for spam filters and recommendations; 2012, deep learning, when computers learn to see; and 2017, the Transformer, the design behind today’s models. The last few years of that line are magnified into a second, full-width timeline: 2022, ChatGPT reaches 100 million users in two months; 2024, models that think before they answer; 2025 to 2026, agents that work on a task for hours.
Slide from the training deck, labeled Demo 6, live, and titled A rent roll, turned into answers inside Excel. A navy panel headed What I ask holds the prompt: Show lease expirations by year, the weighted average lease term, our top ten tenants by rent, and which leases sit below an assumed market rent of $1.45 per square foot per month. Add a chart. Show your formulas. Beside it, a mock Excel window shows a fictional 30-tenant rent roll for Cobalt Ridge, a SUMPRODUCT formula in the formula bar, and a Claude panel that has added a summary sheet with formulas and a bar chart of lease expirations from 2027 to 2031. Numbered markers tie to a Watch for list: formulas you can inspect, totals that tie to the rent roll, and anything it assumed. The footer gives the tool and setting as Claude for Excel, Opus at high effort, also naming Copilot in Excel and ChatGPT for Excel, and lists finance, asset management, and acquisitions as uses.

Thank you for reading. If you enjoyed this - please share it with others.

Share Intelligence by Intent

I’ll be back on a more regular publishing schedule in a few days once I get over the jet lag ;) I will also share more pictures of Magnus again too.

All insights Subscribe on Substack

Let's talk

Ready to apply this at your firm?

A 30-minute call. I'll identify which workflows are worth prioritizing and the right way in.

Prefer to reach me directly? steve@intelligencebyintent.com (805) 876-4847

Please don't include confidential client information in an email.