Model Comparison
Claude 4.1 Opus (Non-reasoning)
vs. Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · Anthropic
Recommended Pick
An Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning) 9 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning)
100.0 value score
38.2 reasoning / $6.00/1M
Lowest Price
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning)
$3.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning)
38.2 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning)
33.5 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning) is 5.0x cheaper on input tokens than Claude 4.1 Opus (Non-reasoning).
Speed gap
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning) generates about 1.5x as many tokens per second as Claude 4.1 Opus (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning) leads Claude 4.1 Opus (Non-reasoning) by 2.2 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning) wins 9 measurable categories, including Value, Input price, Output price, Blended price.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Claude 4.1 Opus (Non-reasoning)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | An Claude 4.1 Opus (Non-reasoning) | Top Pick An Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $15.00/1M | $3.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $75.00/1M | $15.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $30.00/1M | $6.00/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Anthropic | Anthropic |
| Release Date | Aug 5, 2025 | Sep 29, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 42.4 tok/s | 62.7 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1782ms | 1237ms |
| Latency | 1782ms | 1237ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 18.9 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 36.0 | 38.2 |
| Intelligence | 36.0 | 37.1 |
| Coding | — | 33.5 |
| Math | — | 37.0 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | — | 72.7% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 86.0% |
| HLE | — | 7.1% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 59.0% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 37.0% |
| SciCode | — | 42.8% |
| LCR | — | 51.3% |
| IFBench | — | 42.7% |
| TAU-bench v2 | — | 70.5% |
| TerminalBench Hard | — | 28.8% |
Key Takeaways
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $3.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 38.2 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning) reaches a 33.5 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Claude 4.1 Opus (Non-reasoning)
- General-purpose AI
- Versatile applications
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
