The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Beam 1.0 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5

Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 58.4 to 44.6. Beam 1.0 is 6.7x cheaper per token.

Reflection AI · Anthropic · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 58.4 to 44.6, ranking #2 overall.

In the 5 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Sonnet 5.5 wins 5; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, Beam 1.0 is roughly 6.7x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Beam 1.0 also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Beam 1.0

  • cost matters — it's about 6.7x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Claude Sonnet 5.5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 58.4 and ranks #2 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 5 of 5 exact shared results

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Beam 1.0
Reflection AI
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Anthropic
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
44.6
#46
58.4
#2
Reasoning
45.5
#37
57.2
#3
Coding
33.7
#39
47.6
#2
Agents
28.8
#53
43.3
#3
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
0 of 5
5 of 5
Input price
$0.40 / M
$2.00 / M
Output price
$1.20 / M
$10.00 / M
Context window
1,048,576
1,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared
Index
Beam 1.0
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Math
35.1#45
38.7#25
Vision
15.9#105
41.5#2
Tool use
26.4#32
35.8#2
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

22 reported for Beam 1.0 · 47 for Claude Sonnet 5.5

5 shared

Beam 1.0 outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Claude Sonnet 5.5 is better at 5 benchmarks (AutomationBench, DeepSWE 1.1, Humanity's Last Exam (with tools), SWE-bench Multilingual, SWE-Bench Pro).

Claude Sonnet 5.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Oct 22 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Beam 1.0 costs less

For input processing, Beam 1.0 ($0.40/1M tokens) is 5.0x cheaper than Claude Sonnet 5.5 ($2.00/1M tokens).

For output processing, Beam 1.0 ($1.20/1M tokens) is 8.3x cheaper than Claude Sonnet 5.5 ($10.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Sonnet 5.5 is more expensive than Beam 1.0.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Oct 22 2026 • llm-stats.com
Reflection AI
Beam 1.0
Input tokens$0.40
Output tokens$1.20
Best providerTogether
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Input tokens$2.00
Output tokens$10.00
Best providerAnthropic
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Beam 1.0 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Claude Sonnet 5.5's 1,000,000 tokens. Beam 1.0 can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while Claude Sonnet 5.5 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Reflection AI
Beam 1.0
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Thu Oct 22 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Sonnet 5.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Beam 1.0 does not.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Beam 1.0

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Beam 1.0 is licensed under Apache 2.0, while Claude Sonnet 5.5 uses a proprietary license.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Beam 1.0

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Beam 1.0 was released on 2026-10-16, while Claude Sonnet 5.5 was released on 2026-09-28.

Beam 1.0 is 1 month newer than Claude Sonnet 5.5.

Beam 1.0

Oct 16, 2026

4 days ago

2w newer
Claude Sonnet 5.5

Sep 28, 2026

3 weeks ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Beam 1.0 has a knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-30, while Claude Sonnet 5.5 has a cutoff of 2026-06-01.

Beam 1.0 has more recent training data (up to 2026-06-30), making it potentially better informed about events through that date compared to Claude Sonnet 5.5 (2026-06-01).

Beam 1.0

Jun 2026

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Jun 2026

Provider Availability

Beam 1.0 is available from Together, Reflection AI. Claude Sonnet 5.5 is available from Anthropic.

Beam 1.0

together logo
Together
Input Price:Input: $0.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M
reflection logo
Unknown Organization

Claude Sonnet 5.5

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $2.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $10.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Beam 1.0 and Claude Sonnet 5.5 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Beam 1.0
✓ Preferred
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Beam 1.0 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5.

Which is better, Beam 1.0 or Claude Sonnet 5.5?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 58.4 to 44.6. Beam 1.0 is made by Reflection AI and Claude Sonnet 5.5 is made by Anthropic. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Beam 1.0 compare to Claude Sonnet 5.5 in benchmarks?

Beam 1.0 scores AIME 2026: 97.7%, GPQA: 90.6%, LiveCodeBench: 88.3%, SWE-Bench Verified: 81.6%, MCP Atlas: 80.8%. Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores BenchCAD (with Python tool): 96.3%, ArXivMath (with tools): 95.2%, Global-MMLU: 92.1%, MILU: 91.6%, SWE-bench Multilingual: 90.3%.

Is Beam 1.0 cheaper than Claude Sonnet 5.5?

Beam 1.0 is 5.0x cheaper for input tokens. Beam 1.0 costs $0.40/M input and $1.20/M output via together. Claude Sonnet 5.5 costs $2.00/M input and $10.00/M output via anthropic.

What are the context window sizes for Beam 1.0 and Claude Sonnet 5.5?

Beam 1.0 supports 1.0M tokens and Claude Sonnet 5.5 supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Beam 1.0 and Claude Sonnet 5.5?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (44.6 vs 58.4), context window (1.0M vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.40 vs $2.00/M), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Apache 2.0 vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Beam 1.0 and Claude Sonnet 5.5?

Beam 1.0 is developed by Reflection AI and Claude Sonnet 5.5 is developed by Anthropic.

Related comparisons