Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Claude 4.1 Opus
51
Claude 4 Sonnet
50
Pick Claude 4.1 Opus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 4 Sonnet only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
Coding
+1.8 difference
Claude 4.1 Opus
Claude 4 Sonnet
$15 / $75
$3 / $15
29 t/s
40 t/s
1.66s
1.33s
200K
200K
Pick Claude 4.1 Opus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 4 Sonnet only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
Claude 4.1 Opus finishes one point ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 51 to 50. That is enough to call, but not enough to treat as a blowout. This matchup comes down to a few meaningful edges rather than one model dominating the board.
Claude 4.1 Opus's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 74.5 against 72.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 74.5% to 72.7%.
Claude 4.1 Opus is also the more expensive model on tokens at $15.00 input / $75.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens for Claude 4 Sonnet. That is roughly 5.0x on output cost alone.
Claude 4.1 Opus is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 51 to 50. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 74.5% and 72.7%.
Claude 4.1 Opus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 74.5 versus 72.7. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.