The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4

Claude Opus 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude Sonnet 4 is 1.7x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Anthropic · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Opus 4.6 outperforms in 4 benchmarks (AIME 2025, GPQA, MMMLU, SWE-Bench Verified), while Claude Sonnet 4 is better at 0 benchmarks. Claude Opus 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

On price, Claude Sonnet 4 is roughly 1.7x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude Opus 4.6 also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current benchmark, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude Opus 4.6

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 4 of 4 shared benchmarks
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Feb 2026

Choose Claude Sonnet 4

  • cost matters — it's about 1.7x cheaper per token

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Opus 4.6
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4
Anthropic
Benchmark wins
4 of 4
0 of 4
Input price
$5.00 / M
$3.00 / M
Output price
$25.00 / M
$15.00 / M
Context window
1,000,000
200,000
Released
Feb 2026
May 2025
License
Proprietary
Proprietary

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

4 benchmarks

Claude Opus 4.6 outperforms in 4 benchmarks (AIME 2025, GPQA, MMMLU, SWE-Bench Verified), while Claude Sonnet 4 is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Wed Aug 26 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Playground indexes and blind preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Claude Sonnet 4 costs less

For input processing, Claude Opus 4.6 ($5.00/1M tokens) is 1.7x more expensive than Claude Sonnet 4 ($3.00/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Opus 4.6 ($25.00/1M tokens) is 1.7x more expensive than Claude Sonnet 4 ($15.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Opus 4.6 is more expensive than Claude Sonnet 4.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Wed Aug 26 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6
Input tokens$5.00
Output tokens$25.00
Best providerAnthropic
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Opus 4.6 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Claude Sonnet 4's 200,000 tokens. Claude Opus 4.6 can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while Claude Sonnet 4 is limited to 64,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4
Input200,000 tokens
Output64,000 tokens
Wed Aug 26 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Claude Opus 4.6 and Claude Sonnet 4 support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude Opus 4.6

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Claude Sonnet 4

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 Opus 4.6

Proprietary

Closed source

Claude Sonnet 4

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 4.6 was released on 2026-02-05, while Claude Sonnet 4 was released on 2025-05-22.

Claude Opus 4.6 is 9 months newer than Claude Sonnet 4.

Claude Opus 4.6

Feb 5, 2026

6 months ago

8mo newer
Claude Sonnet 4

May 22, 2025

1.3 years ago

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 Opus 4.6 is available from Anthropic. Claude Sonnet 4 is available from Anthropic, Bedrock, Google.

Claude Opus 4.6

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $5.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $25.00/1M

Claude Sonnet 4

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
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Opus 4.6 and Claude Sonnet 4 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Opus 4.6
✓ Preferred
Claude Sonnet 4
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.6 or Claude Sonnet 4?

Claude Opus 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude Opus 4.6 is made by Anthropic and Claude Sonnet 4 is made by Anthropic. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Claude Opus 4.6 compare to Claude Sonnet 4 in benchmarks?

Claude Opus 4.6 scores Vending-Bench 2: 100.0%, AIME 2025: 99.8%, Tau2 Telecom: 99.3%, Graphwalks parents >128k: 95.4%, Tau2 Retail: 91.9%. Claude Sonnet 4 scores MMMLU: 86.5%, TAU-bench Retail: 80.5%, GPQA: 75.4%, MMMU: 74.4%, SWE-Bench Verified: 72.7%.

Is Claude Opus 4.6 cheaper than Claude Sonnet 4?

Claude Sonnet 4 is 1.7x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Opus 4.6 costs $5.00/M input and $25.00/M output via anthropic. Claude Sonnet 4 costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output via anthropic.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Opus 4.6 and Claude Sonnet 4?

Claude Opus 4.6 supports 1.0M tokens and Claude Sonnet 4 supports 200K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Opus 4.6 and Claude Sonnet 4?

Key differences include context window (1.0M vs 200K), input pricing ($5.00 vs $3.00/M). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Related comparisons