Model Comparison

Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs o1

o1 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks. Claude 3.5 Sonnet is 4.4x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

11 benchmarks

Claude 3.5 Sonnet outperforms in 3 benchmarks (HumanEval, MGSM, SWE-Bench Verified), while o1 is better at 8 benchmarks (GPQA, GSM8k, MATH, MathVista, MMLU, MMMU, TAU-bench Airline, TAU-bench Retail).

o1 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Tue Apr 14 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Claude 3.5 Sonnet costs less

For input processing, Claude 3.5 Sonnet ($3.00/1M tokens) is 5.0x cheaper than o1 ($15.00/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude 3.5 Sonnet ($15.00/1M tokens) is 4.0x cheaper than o1 ($60.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, o1 is more expensive than Claude 3.5 Sonnet.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Apr 14 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
OpenAI
o1
Input tokens$15.00
Output tokens$60.00
Best providerAzure
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Both models have the same input context window of 200,000 tokens. Claude 3.5 Sonnet can generate longer responses up to 200,000 tokens, while o1 is limited to 100,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
OpenAI
o1
Input200,000 tokens
Output100,000 tokens
Tue Apr 14 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Claude 3.5 Sonnet supports multimodal inputs, whereas o1 does not.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Text
Images
Audio
Video

o1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.

Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Proprietary

Closed source

o1

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.5 Sonnet was released on 2024-10-22, while o1 was released on 2024-12-17.

o1 is 2 months newer than Claude 3.5 Sonnet.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Oct 22, 2024

1.5 years ago

o1

Dec 17, 2024

1.3 years ago

1mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Claude 3.5 Sonnet is available from Anthropic, Bedrock, Google. o1 is available from Azure, OpenAI.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M
bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M
google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M

o1

azure logo
Azure
Input Price:Input: $15.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $60.00/1M
openai logo
OpenAI
Input Price:Input: $15.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $60.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Supports multimodal inputs
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Higher HumanEval score (93.7% vs 88.1%)
Higher MGSM score (91.6% vs 89.3%)
Higher SWE-Bench Verified score (49.0% vs 41.0%)
OpenAI
Higher GPQA score (78.0% vs 67.2%)
Higher GSM8k score (97.1% vs 96.4%)
Higher MATH score (96.4% vs 78.3%)
Higher MathVista score (71.8% vs 67.7%)
Higher MMLU score (91.8% vs 90.4%)
Higher MMMU score (77.6% vs 68.3%)
Higher TAU-bench Airline score (50.0% vs 46.0%)
Higher TAU-bench Retail score (70.8% vs 69.2%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
OpenAI
o1

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs o1

o1 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks. Claude 3.5 Sonnet is made by Anthropic and o1 is made by OpenAI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores GSM8k: 96.4%, DocVQA: 95.2%, AI2D: 94.7%, HumanEval: 93.7%, BIG-Bench Hard: 93.1%. o1 scores GSM8k: 97.1%, MATH: 96.4%, GPQA Physics: 92.8%, MMLU: 91.8%, MGSM: 89.3%.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is 5.0x cheaper for input tokens. Claude 3.5 Sonnet costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output via anthropic. o1 costs $15.00/M input and $60.00/M output via azure.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet supports 200K tokens and o1 supports 200K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include input pricing ($3.00 vs $15.00/M), multimodal support (yes vs no). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is developed by Anthropic and o1 is developed by OpenAI.