Model Comparison
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning)
vs. Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · Anthropic
Recommended Pick
An Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) 16 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Throughput, Reasoning
Best Value
Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning)
100.0 value score
69.5 reasoning / $10.94/1M
Lowest Price
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning)
$3.75/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning)
69.5 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning)
47.8 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 Opus 4.5 (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 1.7x cheaper on input tokens than Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning).
Speed gap
Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) generates about 1.1x as many tokens per second as Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) leads Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning) by 31.3 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) leads Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning) by 14.3 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | An Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning) | Top Pick An Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $3.75/1M | $6.25/1M |
| Output Cost | $15.00/1M | $25.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $6.56/1M | $10.94/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Anthropic | Anthropic |
| Release Date | Sep 29, 2025 | Nov 24, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 49.7 tok/s | 55.0 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1440ms | 12211ms |
| Latency | 1440ms | 12211ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 91.6 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 38.2 | 69.5 |
| Intelligence | 37.1 | 49.7 |
| Coding | 33.5 | 47.8 |
| Math | 37.0 | 91.3 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 72.7% | 86.6% |
| MMLU Pro | 86.0% | 89.5% |
| HLE | 7.1% | 28.4% |
| LiveCodeBench | 59.0% | 87.1% |
| AIME 2025 | 37.0% | 91.3% |
| SciCode | 42.8% | 49.5% |
| LCR | 51.3% | 74.0% |
| IFBench | 42.7% | 58.0% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 70.5% | 89.5% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 28.8% | 47.0% |
Key Takeaways
Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $3.75/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 69.5 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) reaches a 47.8 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 4.5 Sonnet (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
