Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Confidence: limited
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking vs Claude Opus 4.5
Updated October 14, 2026. We do not rank this pair: at least one has no public score. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.
Both of these models will change. Get the price, version and retirement notices for the pair, each with its source. Follow model changes
Share or export
Decision reading
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. 3 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
- Shared results
- 3
- Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking only
- 3
- Claude Opus 4.5 only
- 58
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 / 8
Supported: Claude Opus 4.5How the comparison works
Which one for your work
Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.
No workload recommendation clears the current evidence threshold.
Use the matched evidence, workload costs, and sourced specifications below instead of treating a point score as a universal answer.
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.
Confidence: limitedLong documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
No clear pick
The documented context windows are equal.
Confidence: documentedChat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-ratesCache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking does not fit this workload in one request. Claude Opus 4.5 does not fit this workload in one request. Claude Opus 4.5 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking has no comparable published API token rate.
Confidence: rate-fallbackRepository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Which one for a specific job
Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.
The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.
—Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking40.7Claude Opus 4.5
Not comparable · BenchAlign v5.8
The coding row is not comparable on the public lane: at least one model is not measured or not ranked there.
Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.
Same basis rules as the category table below
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
3 Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking only
3 Shared
58 Claude Opus 4.5 only
Shape of the matched evidence
Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.
Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.
GPQAKnowledge
Normalized gap 8.8Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking:78.2%Claude Opus 4.5:87%
Bars run 0–100 on each benchmark’s normalized display scale
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.8 lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.
Agentic
Not comparable- Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
- Not ranked
- Claude Opus 4.5
- 31.2
- Estimated · #87/124
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 15 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Coding
Not comparable- Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
- Not ranked
- Claude Opus 4.5
- 40.7
- Estimated · #62/149
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 6 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Reasoning
Not comparable- Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
- Not ranked
- Claude Opus 4.5
- 78.3
- Unranked · 4 rankable rows
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
- Not ranked
- Claude Opus 4.5
- 48.6
- #49/54
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Knowledge
Not comparable- Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
- Not ranked
- Claude Opus 4.5
- 51.1
- Estimated · #74/181
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 2 vs 6 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
- Not ranked
- Claude Opus 4.5
- 96.5
- #2/17
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Instruction following
Not comparable- Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
- Not ranked
- Claude Opus 4.5
- 31.9
- #116/128
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
- Not ranked
- Claude Opus 4.5
- 61.3
- #9/12
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 4 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking | Claude Opus 4.5 | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Not ranked | 31.2Estimated · #87/124 | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 15 public rows | Not comparable |
| Coding | Not ranked | 40.7Estimated · #62/149 | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 6 public rows | Not comparable |
| Reasoning | Not ranked | 78.3Unranked · 4 rankable rows | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | Not ranked | 48.6#49/54 | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Knowledge | Not ranked | 51.1Estimated · #74/181 | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 2 vs 6 public rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not ranked | 96.5#2/17 | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | Not ranked | 31.9#116/128 | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Math | Not ranked | 61.3#9/12 | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 4 weighted rows | Not comparable |
Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.8) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.
Bars run 0–100Methodology
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.
Chat turn
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
- Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
- Claude Opus 4.5
- $0.0175
- Fits in one request
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking has no comparable published API token rate.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
- Claude Opus 4.5
- $0.325
- Fits in one request
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking has no comparable published API token rate.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
- API rate not published
- Does not fit in one request
- Cached-input rate unavailable
- Claude Opus 4.5
- $1.35
- Does not fit in one request
- Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking does not fit this workload in one request. Claude Opus 4.5 does not fit this workload in one request. Claude Opus 4.5 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking has no comparable published API token rate.
Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationClaude 3.7 Sonnet ThinkingClaude Opus 4.5
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
200K
Claude Opus 4.5
200K
API model ID
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
Not sourced
Claude Opus 4.5
Not sourced
Cached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
No comparable hosted API rate
Claude Opus 4.5
Not published
Documented inputs
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
Not sourced
Claude Opus 4.5
Not sourced
Documented outputs
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
Not sourced
Claude Opus 4.5
Not sourced
Provider availability
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
Not sourced
Claude Opus 4.5
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
Reasoning
Claude Opus 4.5
Non-Reasoning
Weight access
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
Proprietary
Claude Opus 4.5
Proprietary
License
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
Proprietary
Claude Opus 4.5
Proprietary
Release date
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking
2025-02-24
Claude Opus 4.5
2025-11-24
If you already use one of these models
- Deployment change
- Both entries list Anthropic as the provider. Confirm endpoint, model ID, limits, and feature support before switching.
- Quality signal
- At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
- Workload cost
- A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
- Context tradeoff
- Both models list 200K.
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Questions
Which is better, Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking or Claude Opus 4.5?
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.
Which is better for coding, Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking or Claude Opus 4.5?
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking or Claude Opus 4.5?
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.
Which costs less, Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking or Claude Opus 4.5?
Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.
Which has the larger context window, Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking or Claude Opus 4.5?
Both models list the same context window, 200K.
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence64 rows
Agentic
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.559.3%SourceNot directly comparable
OSWorld-Verified
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.566.3%SourceNot directly comparable
OSWorld
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.566.3%SourceNot directly comparable
Claw-Eval
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.559.6%SourceNot directly comparable
QwenClawBench
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.552.3%SourceNot directly comparable
τ³-bench results
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.570.2%SourceNot directly comparable
VITA-Bench
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.523.3%SourceNot directly comparable
DeepPlanning
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.526.4%SourceNot directly comparable
Toolathlon
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.543.5%SourceNot directly comparable
MCP Atlas
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.542.3%SourceNot directly comparable
MCP-Tasks
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.571.8%SourceNot directly comparable
WideResearch
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.576.4%SourceNot directly comparable
CyberGym
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.550.6%SourceNot directly comparable
Gert Labs
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.564.23%SourceNot directly comparable
JobBench
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.532.3%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
SWE-bench Verified
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.580.9%SourceNot directly comparable
LiveCodeBench v6
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.584.8%SourceNot directly comparable
SWE-bench Pro
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.557.1%SourceNot directly comparable
SWE Multilingual
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.577.5%SourceNot directly comparable
NL2Repo
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.543.2%SourceNot directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.559.3%SourceNot directly comparable
Reasoning
Multimodal
MMMU
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking75.0%SourceClaude Opus 4.580.7%SourceClaude Opus 4.5 leads this result
MMMU-Pro
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.570.6%SourceNot directly comparable
RealWorldQA
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.577.0%SourceNot directly comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.587.7%SourceNot directly comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.577.6%SourceNot directly comparable
Video-MME (w/o subtitle)
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.581.4%SourceNot directly comparable
MathVision
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.574.3%SourceNot directly comparable
We-Math
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.570.0%SourceNot directly comparable
DynaMath
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.579.7%SourceNot directly comparable
SimpleVQA
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.565.7%SourceNot directly comparable
CharXiv
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.568.5%SourceNot directly comparable
CountBench
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.590.6%SourceNot directly comparable
AI2D_TEST
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.587.7%SourceNot directly comparable
ERQA
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.546.8%SourceNot directly comparable
VideoMMMU
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.584.4%SourceNot directly comparable
MLVU (M-Avg)
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.581.7%SourceNot directly comparable
ScreenSpot Pro
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.545.7%SourceNot directly comparable
V*
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.567.0%SourceNot directly comparable
Knowledge
GPQA
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking78.2%SourceClaude Opus 4.587%SourceClaude Opus 4.5 leads this result
MMMLU
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking86.1%SourceClaude Opus 4.5—Not directly comparable
SuperGPQA
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.570.6%SourceNot directly comparable
MMLU-Pro
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.589.5%SourceNot directly comparable
MMLU-Redux
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.596.6%SourceNot directly comparable
C-Eval
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.592.2%SourceNot directly comparable
HLE
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.530.8%SourceNot directly comparable
Multilingual
MMLU-ProX
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.585.7%SourceNot directly comparable
NOVA-63
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.556.7%SourceNot directly comparable
INCLUDE
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.586.2%SourceNot directly comparable
PolyMath
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.579.0%SourceNot directly comparable
MAXIFE
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.579.2%SourceNot directly comparable
Instruction following
Math
MATH-500
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking96.2%SourceClaude Opus 4.5—Not directly comparable
AIME 2024
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking61.3%SourceClaude Opus 4.5—Not directly comparable
AIME26
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.595.1%SourceNot directly comparable
HMMT Feb 2025
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.592.9%SourceNot directly comparable
HMMT Nov 2025
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.593.3%SourceNot directly comparable
HMMT Feb 2026
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.585.3%SourceNot directly comparable
MMAnswerBench
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.584.0%SourceNot directly comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.534.386%SourceNot directly comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking—Claude Opus 4.54.878%SourceNot directly comparable
64 public results · 3 shared
Watch Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking vs Claude Opus 4.5
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 5,500+ readers.
Last updated October 14, 2026