Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Llama 5
Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison
Related topics (4)
Compare Claude Sonnet 5.5 by Anthropic against Llama 5 by Meta across real-world coding, reasoning, token economics, and latency.
Changez et Comparez les Modèles
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.
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Modèle Phare de PointeClaude Sonnet 5.5 de Anthropic est un modèle d’IA conçu pour le raisonnement d’entreprise de pointe, l’ingénierie logicielle et la production IA, offrant une fenêtre de contexte de 1M, une vitesse de 105 tokens/s, un indice d’intelligence d
$2.00 / 1M
$10.00 / 1M
1M tokens
82.9%
Llama 5
Modèle de Base à Poids OuvertsLlama 5 de Meta est un modèle d’IA conçu pour l’auto-hébergement sur infrastructure privée, le fine-tuning et la souveraineté des données, offrant une fenêtre de contexte de 5M, une vitesse de 65 tokens/s, un indice d’intelligence de 94/100
$0.00 / 1M
$0.00 / 1M
5M tokens
74%
Différences Clés en un Coup d’Œil
- Llama 5 is 1.0x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
- Llama 5 has a larger context window (5M vs 1M tokens).
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 is faster at 105 tok/s vs 65 tok/s.
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads on SWE-bench coding (82.9% vs 74.0%).
| Caractéristique | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Llama 5 |
|---|---|---|
Intelligence Index Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100) | 78 | 94 |
Provider | Anthropic | Meta |
Input Price Cost per million input tokens | $2.00 / 1M | $0.00 / 1M |
Output Price Cost per million output tokens | $10.00 / 1M | $0.00 / 1M |
Blended Price Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M | $1.54 / 1M | $0.00 / 1M |
Context Window Maximum input + output tokens | 1M tokens~1,500 A4 pages of text | 5M tokens~7,500 A4 pages of text |
Max Output Tokens Per single request | 128K | 128K |
Throughput Speed Tokens generated per second | 105 tok/s | 65 tok/s |
SWE-bench Verified Real-world software engineering | 82.9% | 74% |
GPQA Diamond Graduate-level reasoning | 79.4% | 84% |
Cached Input Price Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens | $0.20 / 1M | $0.00 / 1M |
Qui gagne où ?
At-a-glance decision frameworkScores de Benchmarks Vérifiés
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.
Contamination-free competitive programming problems collected continuously over time.
American Invitational Mathematics Examination — multi-step Olympiad-level reasoning.
Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.
Latence et Temps de Réponse
Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.
Simulateur Interactif de Coût de Tokens
Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.
Claude Sonnet 5.5 · Strengths & Key Advantages
- Fenêtre de contexte de 1M et capacité de sortie maximale de 128K tokens (SWE-bench Verified 82.9% · GPQA Diamond 79.4%)
- Débit rapide de 105 tokens/seconde avec une latence au premier token (TTFT) de 550 ms
- Tarification API optimisée ($2/$10 par million de tokens) avec prise en charge du cache de prompts et des schémas JSON stricts
Considerations & Trade-offs
- Modèle cloud propriétaire ne permettant pas le téléchargement local des poids sur serveur isolé
- Pour les charges à très fort volume, l’activation du cache de prompts et de l’API Batch est recommandée
Llama 5 · Strengths & Key Advantages
- Fenêtre de contexte de 5M et capacité de sortie maximale de 128K tokens (SWE-bench Verified 74% · GPQA Diamond 84%)
- Débit rapide de 65 tokens/seconde avec une latence au premier token (TTFT) de 850 ms
- Poids ouverts (600B+ total (~40-80B )) permettant un déploiement sur site ou cloud privé via vLLM, SGLang ou Ollama
Considerations & Trade-offs
- Nécessite des serveurs GPU dotés de suffisamment de mémoire VRAM pour l’inférence locale à pleine précision
- Sur les problèmes de recherche fondamentale très complexes, les modèles de raisonnement lourd restent supérieurs
Token Use & Task Economics
Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Llama 5 |
|---|---|---|
Cost per Task Estimated USD to finish one task | $3.29 | $0.00 |
Output Tokens / Task Tokens generated per task | 72K | 40K |
Reasoning Tokens / Task Thinking tokens burned per task | 37K | 20K |
Spécifications Techniques
Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.
| Caractéristique | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Llama 5 |
|---|---|---|
| Official API Model ID (SDK) | claude-sonnet-5-5-20260901 | meta-llama/Llama-5 |
| API Protocol | Anthropic Messages API + AWS Bedrock + Vertex AI | OpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGI |
| Release Date | 2026-09 | 2026-04 |
| Knowledge Cutoff | June 2026 | January 2026 |
| Architecture | Adaptive Frontier Multimodal Transformer | Mixture-of-Experts with recursive self-improvement (~600B total, 40-80B active) |
| Parameters | Confidential | 600B+ total (~40-80B active) |
| Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM) | 4,000 – 10,000 RPM (Tier 4 + Priority Tier) · 4,000,000 – 10,000,000 TPM | Unlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud |
| Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K) | Standard rate up to 200K tokens; 2x input/output tier above 200K tokens | Free across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales) |
| Prompt Cache Policy & TTL | $0.2/1M cached read (90% off); 5-min default & 1-hour extended TTL | Automatic prefix KV-caching in vLLM / SGLang (0 cost) |
| 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 | Supported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox tools |
| Official Fine-Tuning Support | Custom Model Tuning via Amazon Bedrock & Prompt Distillation | Full Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory) |
| 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) · Audio (~25–32 tokens/sec) · Video (~258–300 tokens/sec) |
| Quantization & Min GPU VRAM | Cloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API) | BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 372 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 1290 GB VRAM (Native BF16) |
| Safety & Frontier Classification | Anthropic RSP ASL-2 / ASL-3 Constitutional Safety Evaluated | Open-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma) |
| Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2) | SOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise Tier | 100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control |
| Input Modalities | text, vision | text, vision, video, audio |
| Output Modalities | text | text |
Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Llama 5: Réponses Rapides (FAQ)
Which is more intelligent, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Llama 5?
Llama 5 is more intelligent. It scores 94 compared with 78 on the composite Intelligence Index.
Which model is faster?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is faster, generating 105 tokens per second compared with 65 tokens per second.
Which model is cheaper to run?
Llama 5 is cheaper at $0.00 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $1.54 (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 0.85s.
Which model has a larger context window?
Llama 5 has a larger context window, supporting 5M tokens compared with 1M tokens.
Verdict
Choose Claude Sonnet 5.5 for conçu pour le raisonnement d’entreprise de pointe, l’ingénierie logicielle et la production ia, l’intégration rag et les pipelines de production évolutifs., or choose Llama 5 for conçu pour l’auto-hébergement sur infrastructure privée, le fine-tuning et la souveraineté des données, l’intégration rag et les pipelines de production évolutifs..
Questions fréquentes
Which is cheaper: Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Llama 5?+
Claude Sonnet 5.5 costs $2/1M input and $10/1M output tokens, while Llama 5 costs $0/1M input and $0/1M output tokens.
Which model has a larger context window: Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Llama 5?+
Claude Sonnet 5.5 supports 1M tokens whereas Llama 5 supports 5M 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 : Comparatif Benchmarks, Tarifs API et Vitesse (2026)Comparer
- Aion-3.0 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash : Comparatif Benchmarks, Tarifs API et Vitesse (2026)Comparer
- Aion-Mini vs Laguna XS 2.1 : Comparatif Benchmarks, Tarifs API et Vitesse (2026)Comparer
- Aya Expanse 32B vs Llama 3.2 90B Vision : Comparatif Benchmarks, Tarifs API et Vitesse (2026)Comparer
- Aya Expanse 8B vs Command R+ : Comparatif Benchmarks, Tarifs API et Vitesse (2026)Comparer
- Aya Expanse 8B vs Qwen 2.5 7B Instruct : Comparatif Benchmarks, Tarifs API et Vitesse (2026)Comparer
Les scores de benchmarks, tarifs par token et limites évoluent rapidement. Vérifiez toujours les spécifications actuelles sur la documentation officielle du fournisseur.
Sources: Anthropic & Meta Official Documentation