Model comparison
Claude 3 Opus vs Claude Sonnet 4.6
Head-to-head evidence from 4 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude 3 Opus #168 (Supported); Claude Sonnet 4.6 #32 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude 3 Opus and Claude Sonnet 4.6 share 4 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Claude 3 Opus; 29 to Claude Sonnet 4.6.
Updated July 20, 2026- Shared results
- 4
- Claude 3 Opus only
- 1
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 only
- 29
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Claude 3 Opus and Claude Sonnet 4.6 is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 4 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.
Claude 3 Opus is priced at $15.00 input / $75.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens for Claude Sonnet 4.6.
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 3 Opus | Δ | Claude Sonnet 4.6 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Claude 3 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Sonnet 4.665.2 |
| Coding | Claude 3 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Sonnet 4.669.1 |
| Knowledge | Claude 3 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Sonnet 4.666.0 |
| Math | Claude 3 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Sonnet 4.626.4 |
| Multimodal | Claude 3 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Sonnet 4.677.4 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude 3 Opus | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude 3 Opus$15 input / $75 output | Claude Sonnet 4.6$3 input / $15 output | Claude Sonnet 4.6 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude 3 OpusNot available | Claude Sonnet 4.644 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude 3 OpusNot available | Claude Sonnet 4.61.48 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude 3 Opus200K | Claude Sonnet 4.6200K | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 59.1% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 72.1% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 67.8% | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | — | 65.2% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 79.5% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 62.92% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 8.3% | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | — | 36.9% | Not comparable |
Coding8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding IndexSource | 19.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 23.3% | 46.9% | Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 79.6% | Not comparable |
| SWE-RebenchSource | — | 60.7% | Not comparable |
| React Native EvalsSource | — | 80.6% | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | — | 51.48% | Not comparable |
| cursorBench31Source | — | 48.8% | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | — | 24.3% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 11.8% | 35.9% | Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 48.9% | 79.9% | Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 3.1% | 13.2% | Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads |
| GPQASource | — | 89.9% | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 95% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 79.2% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 49% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -2.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 38.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 65.9% | Not comparable |
Math2 benchmarks
Multimodal3 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 41.2% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Claude 3 Opus and Claude Sonnet 4.6 on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for Claude 3 Opus and Claude Sonnet 4.6 today?
Claude 3 Opus: $15.00 input / $75.00 output per 1M tokens Claude Sonnet 4.6: $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
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.