Claude Sonnet 5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5
Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison
Related topics (12)
Claude Sonnet 5 by Anthropic and Claude Sonnet 5.5 by Anthropic represent two of the frontier AI models analyzed in our comprehensive 2026 AI benchmark and LLM comparison. In this head-to-head evaluation, we examine API token pricing, context window specifications, inference speed (tokens per second), and empirical reasoning performance. From a pure economic perspective, Claude Sonnet 5.5 holds a notable pricing advantage for token ingestion. On output generation, Claude Sonnet 5.5 is more economical per million generated tokens. In data-heavy architectures requiring extensive repository or document analysis, both models provide an identical memory horizon with 1,000K tokens. In latency-sensitive production environments, Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads in tokens-per-second throughput, making it ideal for real-time conversational agents and high-concurrency workflows. Below is the complete empirical head-to-head breakdown across cost, speed, context, and capability matrices.
Cambia y Compara Cualquier Modelo
Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.
Claude Sonnet 5
1M generalde Anthropic insignia mainstream modelo de medio-2026, ofreciendo 1-millones-token contexto procesamiento, superior codificación agentes, y multimodal herramienta integración un estándar prices.
$3.00 / 1M
$15.00 / 1M
1M tokens
81.2%
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Gama media 5.5el mainstream medio-nivel insignia de late 2026, heredando el generacional advances de Opus 5.5 un estándar Sonnet precios para producción engineering swarms.
$2.00 / 1M
$10.00 / 1M
1M tokens
82.9%
Diferencias Clave de un Vistazo
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 is 1.5x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 is faster at 105 tok/s vs 95 tok/s.
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads on SWE-bench coding (82.9% vs 81.2%).
| Característica | Claude Sonnet 5 | Claude Sonnet 5.5 |
|---|---|---|
Intelligence Index Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100) | 68 | 78 |
Provider | Anthropic | Anthropic |
Input Price Cost per million input tokens | $3.00 / 1M | $2.00 / 1M |
Output Price Cost per million output tokens | $15.00 / 1M | $10.00 / 1M |
Blended Price Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M | $2.31 / 1M | $1.54 / 1M |
Context Window Maximum input + output tokens | 1M tokens~1,500 A4 pages of text | 1M tokens~1,500 A4 pages of text |
Max Output Tokens Per single request | 128K | 128K |
Throughput Speed Tokens generated per second | 95 tok/s | 105 tok/s |
SWE-bench Verified Real-world software engineering | 81.2% | 82.9% |
GPQA Diamond Graduate-level reasoning | 77.5% | 79.4% |
Cached Input Price Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens | $0.30 / 1M | $0.20 / 1M |
¿Quién gana en cada área?
At-a-glance decision frameworkPuntuaciones de Benchmarks Verificadas
Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.
Industry benchmark evaluating real-world GitHub issue resolution and multi-file debugging.
Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.
Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.
Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.
Autonomous multi-step tasks executed inside a real command-line terminal environment.
Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.
Latencia y Tiempo de Respuesta
Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.
Simulador Interactivo de Costos de Tokens
Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.
Claude Sonnet 5 · Strengths & Key Advantages
- 81.2% SWE-bench Verified codificación prowess un estándar $3/$15 empresarial precios
- nativo 1M token ventana de contexto handling entire corporativo codebases en un único prompt
- excepcional CursorBench4 rating (30.8) y bajo costo-por-tarea metrics ($3.48)
Considerations & Trade-offs
- alto razonamiento cargas de trabajo puede see brief rendimiento throttling during pico cloud hours
- Trailing el especializado Opus 5 en abierto-ended científico proofs
Claude Sonnet 5.5 · Strengths & Key Advantages
- Incredible 82.9% SWE-bench Verified score un cotidiano $3/$15 API rates
- completo 1M token contexto con alto-velocidad 105 tokens/sec generación
- Streamlined multi-agente coordination con bajo latencia
Considerations & Trade-offs
- Slightly behind Opus 5.5 en extremely denso multi-hour científico theorems
- Cached prompt overhead during masivo 1M token updates
Token Use & Task Economics
Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5 | Claude Sonnet 5.5 |
|---|---|---|
Cost per Task Estimated USD to finish one task | $3.48 | $3.29 |
Output Tokens / Task Tokens generated per task | 72K | 72K |
Reasoning Tokens / Task Thinking tokens burned per task | 38K | 37K |
Especificaciones Técnicas
Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.
| Característica | Claude Sonnet 5 | Claude Sonnet 5.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Official API Model ID (SDK) | claude-sonnet-5-20260601 | claude-sonnet-5-5-20260901 |
| API Protocol | Anthropic Messages API + AWS Bedrock + Vertex AI | Anthropic Messages API + AWS Bedrock + Vertex AI |
| Release Date | 2026-06 | 2026-09 |
| Knowledge Cutoff | March 2026 | June 2026 |
| Architecture | Next-Gen 1M Multimodal Agent Engine | Adaptive Frontier Multimodal Transformer |
| Parameters | Confidential | Confidential |
| Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM) | 4,000 – 10,000 RPM (Tier 4 + Priority Tier) · 4,000,000 – 10,000,000 TPM | 4,000 – 10,000 RPM (Tier 4 + Priority Tier) · 4,000,000 – 10,000,000 TPM |
| Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K) | Standard rate up to 200K tokens; 2x input/output tier above 200K tokens | Standard rate up to 200K tokens; 2x input/output tier above 200K tokens |
| Prompt Cache Policy & TTL | $0.3/1M cached read (90% off); 5-min default & 1-hour extended TTL | $0.2/1M cached read (90% off); 5-min default & 1-hour extended TTL |
| Computer Use / GUI Agent | Supported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops) | Supported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops) |
| MCP & Parallel Tool Calling | Native MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema | Native MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema |
| Web Search Grounding & Sandbox | Native Web Search Citations + Code Execution Tool + MCP Connectors | Native Web Search Citations + Code Execution Tool + MCP Connectors |
| Official Fine-Tuning Support | Custom Model Tuning via Amazon Bedrock & Prompt Distillation | Custom Model Tuning via Amazon Bedrock & Prompt Distillation |
| Multimodal Token Billing | Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile) | Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile) |
| Quantization & Min GPU VRAM | Cloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API) | Cloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API) |
| Safety & Frontier Classification | Anthropic RSP ASL-2 / ASL-3 Constitutional Safety Evaluated | Anthropic RSP ASL-2 / ASL-3 Constitutional Safety Evaluated |
| Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2) | SOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise Tier | SOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise Tier |
| Input Modalities | text, vision | text, vision |
| Output Modalities | text | text |
Claude Sonnet 5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5: Respuestas Rápidas (FAQ)
Which is more intelligent, Claude Sonnet 5 or Claude Sonnet 5.5?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is more intelligent. It scores 78 compared with 68 on the composite Intelligence Index.
Which model is faster?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is faster, generating 105 tokens per second compared with 95 tokens per second.
Which model is cheaper to run?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is cheaper at $1.54 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $2.31 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).
Which model has lower latency?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.55s compared with 0.60s.
Veredicto
Verdict & Model Selection Recommendation: Choose Claude Sonnet 5 if your priority is Autonomous coding IDE integrations, enterprise repository maintenance, and general-purpose intelligence. Its performance in demanding tasks justifies its operational token cost. Choose Claude Sonnet 5.5 if your workflow prioritizes Daily production development, agentic workflows, IDE integrations, and automated code review. For large-scale batch processing or customer-facing conversational interfaces, its balance of speed and economics delivers superior ROI.
Preguntas frecuentes
How does Claude Sonnet 5 compare to Claude Sonnet 5.5 in API token pricing and cost per token?+
Claude Sonnet 5 costs $3.00 per 1M input tokens and $15.00 per 1M output tokens, whereas Claude Sonnet 5.5 costs $2.00 input and $10.00 output. Overall, Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the more cost-effective model for high-volume API pipelines. Both models support prompt caching discounts of up to 90% for repeated prompt prefixes.
Which model has a larger context window: Claude Sonnet 5 or Claude Sonnet 5.5?+
Both Claude Sonnet 5 and Claude Sonnet 5.5 offer an identical context window of 1,000K tokens (~750k words). Both architectures provide equal capacity for large document ingestion, multi-file codebases, and extended multi-turn conversation histories.
Which AI model is better for software engineering and coding: Claude Sonnet 5 or Claude Sonnet 5.5?+
Claude Sonnet 5 scores 81.2% on SWE-bench Verified while Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores 82.9%. For autonomous software engineering and multi-file debugging, Claude Sonnet 5.5 holds the verified benchmark lead.
What is the difference in reasoning capability and extended thinking between Claude Sonnet 5 and Claude Sonnet 5.5?+
Claude Sonnet 5 features native chain-of-thought extended thinking mode with configurable reasoning effort. In contrast, Claude Sonnet 5.5 provides chain-of-thought reasoning depth for complex math and science.
How does inference speed (tokens per second) compare between Claude Sonnet 5 and Claude Sonnet 5.5?+
Claude Sonnet 5 generates approximately 95 tokens per second, while Claude Sonnet 5.5 delivers 105 tokens per second. In latency-sensitive production environments, Claude Sonnet 5.5 provides faster time-to-first-token (TTFT) and higher streaming response velocity.
Can you implement a tiered LLM routing setup combining Claude Sonnet 5 and Claude Sonnet 5.5 to optimize costs?+
Yes! High-efficiency architectures route high-frequency routine classification and conversational tasks to Claude Sonnet 5.5 to save operational costs, and dynamically escalate complex architectural queries or reasoning tasks to Claude Sonnet 5. This tiered routing pattern cuts overall API bills by up to 70%.
Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.
Related reading
- Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Sonnet 5: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparar
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparar
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Gemini 4 Argon: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparar
- Claude Sonnet 5 vs Claude Opus 4.8: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparar
- Devstral 2 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparar
- GPT-5.1 Codex Max vs Claude Sonnet 5.5: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparar
Las puntuaciones de benchmarks, precios por token y límites de tasa evolucionan rápidamente. Verifique siempre las especificaciones actuales en la documentación oficial del proveedor.
Fuentes: GetInfoUs Independent AI Benchmarks & Official API Specs