Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins on 15/16 benchmarks
Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins 15 of 16 shared benchmarks. Leads in reasoning · coding · knowledge.
Category leads
reasoning·Claude Sonnet 4.5coding·Claude Sonnet 4.5knowledge·Claude Sonnet 4.5math·Claude Sonnet 4.5
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
Claude Sonnet 4.5
#132 by perf·no signal
Claude Opus 4
#133 by perf·no signal
Best value
Claude Sonnet 4.5
5.0x better value than Claude Opus 4
Claude Sonnet 4.5
4.7 pts/$
$9.00/M
Claude Opus 4
0.9 pts/$
$45.00/M
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
Anthropic
$380.0B·Tier 1
Anthropic
$380.0B·Tier 1
Head to head
16 benchmarks · 2 models
Claude Sonnet 4.5Claude Opus 4
ARC-AGI
Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads by +28.0
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
63.7
Claude Opus 4
35.7
ARC-AGI-2
Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads by +5.0
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
13.6
Claude Opus 4
8.6
Cybench
Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads by +22.0
Cybench · evaluates AI on real Capture-The-Flag cybersecurity challenges, testing vulnerability analysis, exploitation, and security reasoning.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
60.0
Claude Opus 4
38.0
DeepResearch Bench
Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads by +3.6
DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
52.6
Claude Opus 4
49.0
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads by +10.7
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
15.2
Claude Opus 4
4.5
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
4.2
Claude Opus 4
4.2
GPQA diamond
Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads by +8.1
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
76.4
Claude Opus 4
68.3
GSO-Bench
Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads by +7.8
GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
14.7
Claude Opus 4
6.9
HLE
Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads by +3.1
HLE (Humanity's Last Exam) · a reasoning benchmark designed to be the hardest public evaluation of AI. Questions span mathematics, physics, philosophy, and logic · curated to be at or beyond the frontier of human expert capability. Tested with and without tool augmentation. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 46.9% without tools and 54.7% with tools · making it one of the few benchmarks where the top score is below 60%.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
9.4
Claude Opus 4
6.2
MATH level 5
Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads by +12.7
MATH Level 5 · the hardest tier of the MATH benchmark, featuring competition-level problems from AMC, AIME, and Olympiad-style mathematics.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
97.7
Claude Opus 4
85.0
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads by +13.4
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
77.8
Claude Opus 4
64.4
SimpleBench
Claude Opus 4 leads by +5.4
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
45.2
Claude Opus 4
50.6
SWE-Bench verified
Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads by +0.6
SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
71.3
Claude Opus 4
70.7
SWE-Bench Verified (Bash Only)
Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads by +3.0
SWE-Bench Verified (Bash Only) · a curated subset of SWE-bench where models fix real Python repository bugs using only bash commands, no agent frameworks.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
70.6
Claude Opus 4
67.6
VPCT
Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads by +2.7
VPCT (Visual Pattern Completion Test) · tests visual reasoning and pattern recognition by having models complete visual sequences and transformations.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
9.7
Claude Opus 4
7.0
WeirdML
Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads by +4.3
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
47.7
Claude Opus 4
43.4
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Claude Opus 4 |
|---|---|---|
ARC-AGI ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization. | 63.7 | 35.7 |
ARC-AGI-2 ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data. | 13.6 | 8.6 |
Cybench Cybench · evaluates AI on real Capture-The-Flag cybersecurity challenges, testing vulnerability analysis, exploitation, and security reasoning. | 60.0 | 38.0 |
DeepResearch Bench DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses. | 52.6 | 49.0 |
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning. | 15.2 | 4.5 |
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning. | 4.2 | 4.2 |
GPQA diamond Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs. | 76.4 | 68.3 |
GSO-Bench GSO-Bench · evaluates AI models on real-world open-source software engineering tasks, testing the ability to understand and resolve actual GitHub issues. | 14.7 | 6.9 |
HLE HLE (Humanity's Last Exam) · a reasoning benchmark designed to be the hardest public evaluation of AI. Questions span mathematics, physics, philosophy, and logic · curated to be at or beyond the frontier of human expert capability. Tested with and without tool augmentation. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 46.9% without tools and 54.7% with tools · making it one of the few benchmarks where the top score is below 60%. | 9.4 | 6.2 |
MATH level 5 MATH Level 5 · the hardest tier of the MATH benchmark, featuring competition-level problems from AMC, AIME, and Olympiad-style mathematics. | 97.7 | 85.0 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 77.8 | 64.4 |
SimpleBench SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking. | 45.2 | 50.6 |
SWE-Bench verified SWE-bench Verified · 500 human-validated tasks from 12 real Python repositories (Django, Flask, scikit-learn, sympy, and others). Each task requires the model to produce a git patch that resolves a real GitHub issue and passes the test suite. The verified subset eliminates ambiguous tasks from the original SWE-bench. Claude Mythos Preview leads at 93.9%, crossing 90% for the first time in 2026. Opus 4.6 scores 80.8%. The benchmark remains the most-cited evaluation for code-generation capability. | 71.3 | 70.7 |
SWE-Bench Verified (Bash Only) SWE-Bench Verified (Bash Only) · a curated subset of SWE-bench where models fix real Python repository bugs using only bash commands, no agent frameworks. | 70.6 | 67.6 |
VPCT VPCT (Visual Pattern Completion Test) · tests visual reasoning and pattern recognition by having models complete visual sequences and transformations. | 9.7 | 7.0 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 47.7 | 43.4 |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $3.00 | $15.00 | 1.0M tokens (~500 books) | $60.00 | |
| $15.00 | $75.00 | 200K tokens (~100 books) | $300.00 |