Claude Sonnet 5 vs Claude Opus 4.8
Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison
Related topics (12)
Claude Sonnet 5 by Anthropic and Claude Opus 4.8 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 holds a notable pricing advantage for token ingestion. On output generation, Claude Sonnet 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 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.
Changez et Comparez les Modèles
Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.
Claude Sonnet 5
1M grand publicd'Anthropic phare mainstream modèle de moyen-2026, offrant 1-millions-token contexte traitement, supérieur codage agents, et multimodal outil intégration à standard prices.
$3.00 / 1M
$15.00 / 1M
1M tokens
81.2%
Claude Opus 4.8
Modèle phare haut de gammele définitif sommet du Claude 4 génération, integrating dynamic cognitif raisonnement profondeur, un 1M token contexte, et optional rapide inférence modes.
$5.00 / 1M
$25.00 / 1M
1M tokens
80.8%
Différences Clés en un Coup d’Œil
- Claude Sonnet 5 is 1.7x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
- Claude Sonnet 5 is faster at 95 tok/s vs 64 tok/s.
- Claude Sonnet 5 leads on SWE-bench coding (81.2% vs 80.8%).
| Caractéristique | Claude Sonnet 5 | Claude Opus 4.8 |
|---|---|---|
Intelligence Index Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100) | 68 | 67 |
Provider | Anthropic | Anthropic |
Input Price Cost per million input tokens | $3.00 / 1M | $5.00 / 1M |
Output Price Cost per million output tokens | $15.00 / 1M | $25.00 / 1M |
Blended Price Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M | $2.31 / 1M | $3.85 / 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 | 64 tok/s |
SWE-bench Verified Real-world software engineering | 81.2% | 80.8% |
GPQA Diamond Graduate-level reasoning | 77.5% | 78.9% |
Cached Input Price Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens | $0.30 / 1M | $0.50 / 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.
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 · Strengths & Key Advantages
- 81.2% SWE-bench Verified codage prowess à standard $3/$15 d'entreprise tarification
- natif 1M token fenêtre de contexte handling entire d'entreprise codebases dans un unique prompt
- exceptionnel CursorBench4 rating (30.8) et faible coût-par-tâche metrics ($3.48)
Considerations & Trade-offs
- élevé raisonnement charges de travail peut see brief débit throttling during sommet cloud hours
- Trailing le spécialisé Opus 5 sur ouvert-ended scientifique proofs
Claude Opus 4.8 · Strengths & Key Advantages
- sommet benchmark performances du Claude 4 series à travers tous raisonnement et mathématiques metrics
- Introduced rapide inférence palier reducing TTFT sur standard conversationnel turns
- inégalé multi-étapes autonome planning pour complexe agent swarms
Considerations & Trade-offs
- Expensive sortie token génération pour élevé-volume non-critical flux de travail
- Significant matériel resource requirements during sommet pensée effort
Token Use & Task Economics
Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5 | Claude Opus 4.8 |
|---|---|---|
Cost per Task Estimated USD to finish one task | $3.48 | $5.49 |
Output Tokens / Task Tokens generated per task | 72K | 72K |
Reasoning Tokens / Task Thinking tokens burned per task | 38K | 37K |
Spécifications Techniques
Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.
| Caractéristique | Claude Sonnet 5 | Claude Opus 4.8 |
|---|---|---|
| Official API Model ID (SDK) | claude-sonnet-5-20260601 | claude-opus-4-8-20260501 |
| API Protocol | Anthropic Messages API + AWS Bedrock + Vertex AI | Anthropic Messages API + AWS Bedrock + Vertex AI |
| Release Date | 2026-06 | 2026-05 |
| Knowledge Cutoff | March 2026 | March 2026 |
| Architecture | Next-Gen 1M Multimodal Agent Engine | Frontier Hybrid Cognitive Architecture |
| 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 | $0.5/1M 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 Opus 4.8: Réponses Rapides (FAQ)
Which is more intelligent, Claude Sonnet 5 or Claude Opus 4.8?
Claude Sonnet 5 is more intelligent. It scores 68 compared with 67 on the composite Intelligence Index.
Which model is faster?
Claude Sonnet 5 is faster, generating 95 tokens per second compared with 64 tokens per second.
Which model is cheaper to run?
Claude Sonnet 5 is cheaper at $2.31 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $3.85 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).
Which model has lower latency?
Claude Sonnet 5 has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.60s compared with 1.65s.
Verdict
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 Opus 4.8 if your workflow prioritizes Frontier AI research, multi-agent systems orchestration, and enterprise software engineering. For large-scale batch processing or customer-facing conversational interfaces, its balance of speed and economics delivers superior ROI.
Questions fréquentes
How does Claude Sonnet 5 compare to Claude Opus 4.8 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 Opus 4.8 costs $5.00 input and $25.00 output. Overall, Claude Sonnet 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 Opus 4.8?+
Both Claude Sonnet 5 and Claude Opus 4.8 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 Opus 4.8?+
Claude Sonnet 5 scores 81.2% on SWE-bench Verified while Claude Opus 4.8 scores 80.8%. For autonomous software engineering and multi-file debugging, Claude Sonnet 5 holds the verified benchmark lead.
What is the difference in reasoning capability and extended thinking between Claude Sonnet 5 and Claude Opus 4.8?+
Claude Sonnet 5 features native chain-of-thought extended thinking mode with configurable reasoning effort. In contrast, Claude Opus 4.8 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 Opus 4.8?+
Claude Sonnet 5 generates approximately 95 tokens per second, while Claude Opus 4.8 delivers 64 tokens per second. In latency-sensitive production environments, Claude Sonnet 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 Opus 4.8 to optimize costs?+
Yes! High-efficiency architectures route high-frequency routine classification and conversational tasks to Claude Sonnet 5 to save operational costs, and dynamically escalate complex architectural queries or reasoning tasks to Claude Opus 4.8. 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 ComparisonComparer
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Opus 4.7: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparer
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-5.5 Instant: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparer
- Claude Sonnet 5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparer
- Hunyuan Large V2 vs Claude Opus 4.8: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparer
- Aion-3.0 vs Aion-Mini: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonComparer
Les scores de benchmarks, tarifs par token et limites évoluent rapidement. Vérifiez toujours les spécifications actuelles sur la documentation officielle du fournisseur.
Sources: GetInfoUs Independent AI Benchmarks & Official API Specs