Sonar vs Claude Opus 5.5
Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison
Related topics (4)
Compare Sonar by Perplexity against Claude Opus 5.5 by Anthropic across real-world coding, reasoning, token economics, and latency.
Cambia y Compara Cualquier Modelo
Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.
Live comparison: no in-depth editorial review has been published for this pair yet.
Sonar
Modelo Ligero y EconómicoSonar de Perplexity es un modelo de IA diseñado para máxima eficiencia de costos por token y alta velocidad en producción, con ventana de contexto de 128K, velocidad de 130 tokens/s, índice de inteligencia de 73/100 y tarifa de $1/$1 por 1M
$1.00 / 1M
$1.00 / 1M
128K tokens
N/A
Claude Opus 5.5
Modelo Insignia de FronteraClaude Opus 5.5 de Anthropic es un modelo de IA diseñado para razonamiento empresarial de frontera, programación avanzada y flujos de producción, con ventana de contexto de 1M, velocidad de 78 tokens/s, índice de inteligencia de 94/100 y ta
$4.00 / 1M
$20.00 / 1M
1M tokens
84.6%
Diferencias Clave de un Vistazo
- Sonar is 9.6x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
- Claude Opus 5.5 has a larger context window (1M vs 128K tokens).
- Sonar is faster at 130 tok/s vs 78 tok/s.
| Característica | Sonar | Claude Opus 5.5 |
|---|---|---|
Intelligence Index Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100) | 73 | 94 |
Provider | Perplexity | Anthropic |
Input Price Cost per million input tokens | $1.00 / 1M | $4.00 / 1M |
Output Price Cost per million output tokens | $1.00 / 1M | $20.00 / 1M |
Blended Price Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M | $0.37 / 1M | $3.08 / 1M |
Context Window Maximum input + output tokens | 128K tokens~192 A4 pages of text | 1M tokens~1,500 A4 pages of text |
Max Output Tokens Per single request | 4K | 128K |
Throughput Speed Tokens generated per second | 130 tok/s | 78 tok/s |
SWE-bench Verified Real-world software engineering | N/A | 84.6% |
GPQA Diamond Graduate-level reasoning | N/A | 82.3% |
Cached Input Price Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens | $0.10 / 1M | $0.40 / 1M |
¿Quién gana en cada área?
At-a-glance decision frameworkEvaluations ongoing
Puntuaciones 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.
Extremely difficult, closed-ended questions spanning the frontier of human expert knowledge.
Autonomous multi-step tasks executed inside a real command-line terminal environment.
Research-grade coding problems drawn from real scientific and numerical workloads.
Contamination-free competitive programming problems collected continuously over time.
American Invitational Mathematics Examination — multi-step Olympiad-level reasoning.
Accuracy when reasoning over very large inputs that fill the model context window.
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.
Sonar · Strengths & Key Advantages
- Ventana de contexto de 128K con hasta 4K tokens de salida máxima (MMLU-Pro 71% · Arena Elo 1245)
- Rendimiento ágil de 130 tokens/segundo con latencia inicial (TTFT) de solo 350 ms
- Economía de API competitiva ($1/$1 por 1M de tokens) con soporte para caché de prompts y salidas JSON estructuradas
Considerations & Trade-offs
- Modelo propietario en la nube; no permite descargar los pesos para ejecución local sin conexión
- En demostraciones científicas extremas, los modelos de razonamiento pesado de gama alta ofrecen mayor profundidad
Claude Opus 5.5 · Strengths & Key Advantages
- Ventana de contexto de 1M con hasta 128K tokens de salida máxima (SWE-bench Verified 84.6% · GPQA Diamond 82.3%)
- Rendimiento ágil de 78 tokens/segundo con latencia inicial (TTFT) de solo 1400 ms
- Economía de API competitiva ($4/$20 por 1M de tokens) con soporte para caché de prompts y salidas JSON estructuradas
Considerations & Trade-offs
- Modelo propietario en la nube; no permite descargar los pesos para ejecución local sin conexión
- En volúmenes masivos de tokens, se recomienda activar el caché de prompts y Batch API para optimizar costos
Token Use & Task Economics
Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.
| Metric | Sonar | Claude Opus 5.5 |
|---|---|---|
Cost per Task Estimated USD to finish one task | $0.05 | $3.85 |
Output Tokens / Task Tokens generated per task | 10K | 68K |
Reasoning Tokens / Task Thinking tokens burned per task | 0K | 42K |
Especificaciones Técnicas
Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.
| Característica | Sonar | Claude Opus 5.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Official API Model ID (SDK) | sonar | claude-opus-5-5-20260901 |
| API Protocol | Perplexity REST API (OpenAI-Compatible) | Anthropic Messages API + AWS Bedrock + Vertex AI |
| Release Date | 2024-01 | 2026-09 |
| Knowledge Cutoff | Real-time (Web-grounded) | June 2026 |
| Architecture | Web-Search Augmented Autoregressive Transformer | Extended Autonomous Hybrid Reasoning Transformer |
| Parameters | Confidential / Llama 3 Fine-Tune | Confidential |
| Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM) | 5,000 – 15,000 RPM (Production Tier) · 800,000 – 2,000,000 TPM | 4,000 – 10,000 RPM (Tier 4 + Priority Tier) · 4,000,000 – 10,000,000 TPM |
| Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K) | Flat rate ($1/1M in) across full 128K window | Standard rate up to 200K tokens; 2x input/output tier above 200K tokens |
| Prompt Cache Policy & TTL | Cached input at $0.1/1M tokens | $0.4/1M cached read (90% off); 5-min default & 1-hour extended TTL |
| Computer Use / GUI Agent | API / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop) | 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 | Supported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox tools | Native Web Search Citations + Code Execution Tool + MCP Connectors |
| Official Fine-Tuning Support | API Prompt Engineering & RAG Distillation | Custom Model Tuning via Amazon Bedrock & Prompt Distillation |
| Multimodal Token Billing | Text BPE (~4 chars/token) | 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 | Perplexity Production Safety & Alignment Verified | 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 | text, vision |
| Output Modalities | text | text |
Sonar vs Claude Opus 5.5: Respuestas Rápidas (FAQ)
Which is more intelligent, Sonar or Claude Opus 5.5?
Claude Opus 5.5 is more intelligent. It scores 94 compared with 73 on the composite Intelligence Index.
Which model is faster?
Sonar is faster, generating 130 tokens per second compared with 78 tokens per second.
Which model is cheaper to run?
Sonar is cheaper at $0.37 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $3.08 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).
Which model has lower latency?
Sonar has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.35s compared with 1.40s.
Which model has a larger context window?
Claude Opus 5.5 has a larger context window, supporting 1M tokens compared with 128K tokens.
Veredicto
Choose Sonar for ideal para máxima eficiencia de costos por token y alta velocidad en producción, sistemas rag empresariales y automatización mediante api., or choose Claude Opus 5.5 for ideal para razonamiento empresarial de frontera, programación avanzada y flujos de producción, sistemas rag empresariales y automatización mediante api..
Preguntas frecuentes
Which is cheaper: Sonar or Claude Opus 5.5?+
Sonar costs $1/1M input and $1/1M output tokens, while Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4/1M input and $20/1M output tokens.
Which model has a larger context window: Sonar or Claude Opus 5.5?+
Sonar supports 128K tokens whereas Claude Opus 5.5 supports 1M tokens.
Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.
Related reading
- Aion-3.0 vs. Aion-Mini: Comparativa de Benchmarks, Precios API y Velocidad (2026)Comparar
- Aion-3.0 vs. Gemini 3.6 Flash: Comparativa de Benchmarks, Precios API y Velocidad (2026)Comparar
- Aion-Mini vs. Laguna XS 2.1: Comparativa de Benchmarks, Precios API y Velocidad (2026)Comparar
- Aya Expanse 32B vs. Llama 3.2 90B Vision: Comparativa de Benchmarks, Precios API y Velocidad (2026)Comparar
- Aya Expanse 8B vs. Command R+: Comparativa de Benchmarks, Precios API y Velocidad (2026)Comparar
- Aya Expanse 8B vs. Qwen 2.5 7B Instruct: Comparativa de Benchmarks, Precios API y Velocidad (2026)Comparar
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: Perplexity & Anthropic Official Documentation