Model comparison
Claude 4.1 Opus vs Ternary Bonsai 1.7B
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4.1 Opus #142 (Supported); Ternary Bonsai 1.7B unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude 4.1 Opus and Ternary Bonsai 1.7B share 0 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to Claude 4.1 Opus; 0 to Ternary Bonsai 1.7B.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Claude 4.1 Opus only
- 4
- Ternary Bonsai 1.7B only
- 0
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Claude 4.1 Opus and Ternary Bonsai 1.7B is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 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 does not have sourced benchmark coverage for Ternary Bonsai 1.7B yet. This comparison is currently limited to metadata such as context window, reasoning mode, and pricing where available.
Claude 4.1 Opus is priced at $15.00 input / $75.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Ternary Bonsai 1.7B. Claude 4.1 Opus has the larger context window at 200K, compared with 32K for Ternary Bonsai 1.7B.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude 4.1 Opus | Ternary Bonsai 1.7B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude 4.1 Opus$15 input / $75 output | Ternary Bonsai 1.7B$0 input / $0 output | Ternary Bonsai 1.7B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude 4.1 Opus29 tok/s | Ternary Bonsai 1.7BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude 4.1 Opus1.66 s | Ternary Bonsai 1.7BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude 4.1 Opus200K | Ternary Bonsai 1.7B32K | Claude 4.1 Opus lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | Ternary Bonsai 1.7B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| JobBenchSource | 21.9% | — | Not comparable |
Coding1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | Ternary Bonsai 1.7B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 74.5% | — | Not comparable |
Knowledge1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | Ternary Bonsai 1.7B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 28.2% | — | Not comparable |
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus | Ternary Bonsai 1.7B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1207 | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Claude 4.1 Opus and Ternary Bonsai 1.7B 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 4.1 Opus and Ternary Bonsai 1.7B today?
Claude 4.1 Opus: $15.00 input / $75.00 output per 1M tokens Ternary Bonsai 1.7B: $0.00 input / $0.00 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.