Data as of October 17, 2026 · How the score is built
Released May 22, 2025200K context
Claude 4 Sonnet
Decision readingClaude 4 Sonnet scores 38.1 out of 100 and ranks #147 of 224. This profile shows 4 source-displayable benchmark rows. API pricing is $3 input and $15 output per million tokens.
Released May 22, 2025 — see all recent releases
Decision snapshot
Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.
Capability
38.1/100
field median 49.6#147 of 224 ranked models
Public
#147of 224
Verified —
Price
$3input / $15 output
input median $0.75blended $9
Speed
40tok/s
field median 92 tok/sFirst token 1.33 s
Context
200Ktokens
field median 256,000Reported for this model; direct source link not stored
Strongest published evidence
Published rows are visible, but no category has enough eligible evidence for a comparative rank.
Validate before choosing
4 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty.
Source-linked · 4 displayable benchmark rows
Category score record
Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.
| Category | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticWeight 22%2 benchmarksVerified | Score pending | 2 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| CodingRank Not rankedWeight 20%1 benchmarkVerified | 59.4 | 1 benchmark | Verified | |||
| ReasoningWeight 17%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| MultimodalWeight 12%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| KnowledgeWeight 12%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| MathWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified | Score pending | 1 benchmark | Verified |
4 of 681 tracked benchmark slots have displayable evidence · bars run 0–100
Coverage detailsHow much of this is verified
Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.
- Agentic2/2 verified
- Coding1/1 verified
- ReasoningNot measured
- MultimodalNot measured
- KnowledgeNot measured
- MultilingualNot measured
- Inst. FollowingNot measured
- Math1/1 verified
Benchmark ledger
Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.
Coding1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSoftware Engineering Benchmark Verified | Score72.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 96% | Gap23.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Agentic2 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| JobBench | Score18.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Wonder Full · 75.3% | Gap56.9 behind | Weight6% ref. weight | Benchmark exact |
| Gert LabsGert Labs Composite Game Benchmark | Score39.66% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 4.8 · 72.97% | Gap33.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
Math1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AIME 2025American Invitational Mathematics Examination 2025 | Score33.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.2 · 100% | Gap66.9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Bars run 0–100; the dark tick marks the best source-verified value
All 4 rowsWhat it costs to get this score
Published API price against the public score. The x-axis uses a log scale; the dashed path marks models that are not beaten by a cheaper, higher-scoring option. Price uses average of published input and output rates.
Claude 4 Sonnet · 38.1 score · $9 blended per million tokens
The chart opens on the current model. Scroll horizontally to inspect the full price axis.
Horizontal: blended price per million tokens, log scale · Vertical: public score
Lineage
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Each score is estimated for that model; a relative can inform a sparse estimate but never sets a floor, so a newer release can score below an earlier one. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
Base entry
Spec sheet
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
- API model ID
- Not published
- Context window
- 200K
- Maximum output
- Not sourced yet
- Knowledge cutoff
- Not sourced yet
- Input modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Output modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Parameters
- Not disclosed by the provider
- Availability
- Not sourced yet
- Cloud regions
- Not tracked yet
- Lifecycle
- Established
- API capabilities
- Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
- Prompt caching
- Not documented in the pricing record
- Self-host
- Weights are not published
- Rate limits
- Not tracked yet
How to read this profile
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
Claude 4 Sonnet ranks #147 of 224 on the public leaderboard with a score of 38.08/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.
Claude 4 Sonnet is a proprietary model with a 200K context window. No explicit reasoning mode is documented in this profile.
4 of 681 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Last updated October 17, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Questions
How does Claude 4 Sonnet perform overall in AI benchmarks?
Claude 4 Sonnet ranks #147 out of 224 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 38.08/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 4 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Is Claude 4 Sonnet good for coding and programming?
Claude 4 Sonnet has source-displayable benchmark coverage for coding and programming, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Is Claude 4 Sonnet good for mathematics?
Claude 4 Sonnet has source-displayable benchmark coverage for mathematics, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Is Claude 4 Sonnet good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
Claude 4 Sonnet has source-displayable benchmark coverage for agentic tool use and computer tasks, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Does Claude 4 Sonnet have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
No. Claude 4 Sonnet currently has 15 source-displayable rows across 681 tracked benchmark slots. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.
What is the context window size of Claude 4 Sonnet?
Claude 4 Sonnet has a reported context window of 200K in the exact-model catalog record. The value stays visible, but the profile marks its source link as unavailable instead of presenting it as directly documented. Maximum output length remains separate because providers often publish a different limit.