Model comparison
Claude 4.1 Opus vs Claude Sonnet 5
Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4.1 Opus #142 (Supported); Claude Sonnet 5 #29 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude 4.1 Opus and Claude Sonnet 5 share 3 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Claude 4.1 Opus; 33 to Claude Sonnet 5.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 3
- Claude 4.1 Opus only
- 1
- Claude Sonnet 5 only
- 33
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Claude Sonnet 5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 4.1 Opus only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Claude Sonnet 5 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 65.32 to 45.88. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Sonnet 5's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 76.7 against 74.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 74.5% to 85.2%.
Claude 4.1 Opus is also the more expensive model on tokens at $15.00 input / $75.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $2.00 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens for Claude Sonnet 5. That is roughly 7.5x on output cost alone. Claude Sonnet 5 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude 4.1 Opus is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Claude Sonnet 5 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude 4.1 Opus.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude 4.1 Opus | Δ | Claude Sonnet 5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Claude 4.1 Opus74.5 | Margin→ 2.2 | Claude Sonnet 576.7 |
| Agentic | Claude 4.1 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Sonnet 581.9 |
| Knowledge | Claude 4.1 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Sonnet 557.4 |
| Multimodal | Claude 4.1 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Sonnet 588.3 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 74.5%B 85.2%Winner: Claude Sonnet 5Δ 10.7SWE-bench Verified: Claude 4.1 Opus scored 74.5%; Claude Sonnet 5 scored 85.2%. Claude Sonnet 5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude 4.1 Opus | Claude Sonnet 5 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude 4.1 Opus$15 input / $75 output | Claude Sonnet 5$2 input / $10 output | Claude Sonnet 5 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude 4.1 Opus29 tok/s | Claude Sonnet 5Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude 4.1 Opus1.66 s | Claude Sonnet 5Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude 4.1 Opus200K | Claude Sonnet 51M | Claude Sonnet 5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | Claude Sonnet 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| JobBenchSource | 21.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 80.4% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 84.7% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | — | 57.4% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 81.2% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1607 | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 46.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 55.4% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 1388 | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 39.2% | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 44.7% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 90.1% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 28.2% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 80.5% | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Sonnet 5 wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | Claude Sonnet 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 74.5% | 85.2% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 63.2% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 78.3% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultimodalSource | — | 28.1% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 80.4% | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | — | 42.7% | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | — | 61.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 71.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 53.6% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | Claude Sonnet 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 28.2% | 53.4% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| HLESource | — | 57.4% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 43.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 91.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 39.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 15.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 38.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 37.3% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude 4.1 Opus or Claude Sonnet 5?
Claude Sonnet 5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 65.32 to 45.88. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 74.5% and 85.2%.
Which is better for coding, Claude 4.1 Opus or Claude Sonnet 5?
Claude Sonnet 5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 76.7 versus 74.5. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.