Capability
64.8/100
field median 58.2
#36 of 218 ranked models
Claude Sonnet 5
Released Jun 30, 2026 — see all recent releases
Decision reading
Claude Sonnet 5 scores 64.8 out of 100 and ranks #36 of 218. This profile shows 19 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Knowledge at #4. API pricing is $2 input and $10 output per million tokens, with cached input at $0.2.
Data as of August 14, 2026 · How the score is built
Strongest published evidence
Knowledge ranks #4. Particularly effective for knowledge-intensive tasks like research, analysis, and factual Q&A.
Validate before choosing
19 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. Coding is its lowest eligible category at #9.
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.
Price
$2input / $10 output
input median $1
cached $0.20 · batch + cache $0.10 · blended $6
Speed
66tok/s
field median 94 tok/s
First token 186.44 s
Context
1Mtokens
field median 200,000
Maximum output length is tracked separately
Capability shape
Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.
Claude Sonnet 5 category percentile values
- Agentic94th percentile
- Coding94th percentile
- ReasoningNot eligible
- Knowledge95th percentile
- MathNot eligible
- MultilingualNot eligible
- MultimodalNot eligible
- Instruction followingNot eligible
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Eligible category ranks
- Agentic#9/130
- Coding#9/135
- ReasoningNot ranked
- Knowledge#4/57
- MathNot ranked
- MultilingualNot ranked
- MultimodalNot ranked
- Inst. FollowingNot ranked
Top decileTop quartileMid-fieldNot eligible
What 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.
The chart opens on the current model. Scroll horizontally to inspect the full price axis.
Current modelClaude Sonnet 5 · 64.8 score · $6 blended per million tokens
Horizontal: blended price per million tokens, log scale · Vertical: public score
How 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.
- Agentic5/5 verified
- Coding9/10 verified
- ReasoningNot measured
- Knowledge2/2 verified
- MathNot measured
- MultilingualNot measured
- Multimodal2/2 verified
- Inst. FollowingNot measured
Verified sourceProvisionalNot measured
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
- claude-sonnet-5Anthropic model overview
- Context window
- 1MAnthropic model overview
- Maximum output
- Not sourced yet
- Knowledge cutoff
- Not sourced yet
- Input modalities
- text, imageAnthropic model overview
- Output modalities
- textAnthropic model overview
- Parameters
- Not disclosed by the provider
- Availability
- Claude APIAnthropic model overview
- Cloud regions
- Not tracked yet
- Lifecycle
- activeAnthropic model overview
- API capabilities
- Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
- Prompt caching
- Published at $0.20 per million cached input tokensClaude API pricing
- Self-host
- Weights are not published
- Rate limits
- Not tracked yet
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticRank #9 of 130Percentile 94thWeight 22%5 benchmarksVerified | 65.1 | #9 of 130 | 94th | 22% | 5 benchmarks | Verified |
| CodingRank #9 of 135Percentile 94thWeight 20%10 benchmarksMixed sources | 68.5 | #9 of 135 | 94th | 20% | 10 benchmarks | Mixed sources |
| ReasoningWeight 17%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 17% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| KnowledgeRank #4 of 57Percentile 95thWeight 12%2 benchmarksVerified | 85.9 | #4 of 57 | 95th | 12% | 2 benchmarks | Verified |
| MathWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 7% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MultimodalRank Not rankedWeight 12%2 benchmarksVerified | 76.1 | Not ranked | Not available | 12% | 2 benchmarks | Verified |
| Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
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.
Coding10 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSoftware Engineering Benchmark Verified | Score85.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 96% | Gap10.8 behind | WeightWeighted 16% | Provider exact |
| SWE-bench Pro | Score63.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Mythos 5 · 80.3% | Gap17.1 behind | WeightWeighted 10% | Provider exact |
| SWE Multilingual | Score78.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 89.5% | Gap11.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| SWE MultimodalSWE-bench Multimodal | Score28.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 59.4% | Gap31.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score80.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9% | Gap11.5 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| FrontierCode 1.1 Main | Score42.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5 · 53.5% | Gap10.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
| cursorBench32 | Score61.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Grok 4.6 · 70.8% | Gap9.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
| APEX-SWE | Score46.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5 · 58.8% | Gap12.4 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
| EEBenchEEBench V1 core corpus | Score40.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Grok 4.6 · 58.3% | Gap18 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
| 3DCodeBench | Score39.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Grok 4.6 · 54.0% | Gap14.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Secondary exact |
Agentic5 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score80.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9% | Gap11.5 behind | WeightWeighted 38% | Provider exact |
| OSWorld-Verified | Score81.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 86.1% | Gap4.9 behind | WeightWeighted 34% | Provider exact |
| BrowseComp | Score84.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 92.2% | Gap7.5 behind | WeightWeighted 28% | Provider exact |
| Terminal-Bench 3.0 | Score14.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 42.7% | Gap28.1 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
| HLE w/ toolsHumanity's Last Exam with tools | Score57.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 64.7% | Gap7.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Knowledge2 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HLEHumanity's Last Exam | Score57.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 64.7% | Gap7.3 behind | WeightWeighted 45% | Provider exact |
| HLE w/o toolsHumanity's Last Exam without tools | Score43.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Mythos 5 · 59% | Gap15.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Multimodal2 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CharXivCharXiv Reasoning | Score88.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Mythos 5 · 93.5% | Gap5.2 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
| CharXiv w/o toolsCharXiv Reasoning without tools | Score77% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Mythos 5 · 88.9% | Gap11.9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Lineage
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
February 2026
Claude Sonnet 4.6Score 64.5 · $3 / $15
Jun 30, 2026 · you are here
Claude Sonnet 5Score 64.8 · $2 / $10
Base entry
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 Sonnet 5 ranks #36 of 218 on the public leaderboard with a score of 64.78/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.
Claude Sonnet 5 is a proprietary model with a 1M context window. It uses an explicit reasoning mode, which can improve complex problem solving while adding latency and token use.
Its explicit predecessor is Claude Sonnet 4.6. 19 of 437 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Knowledge at #4, while its lowest eligible position is Coding at #9. particularly effective for knowledge-intensive tasks like research, analysis, and factual Q&A.
Radar
Full release historyClaude Sonnet 5 release history
Claude Sonnet 5 released
Anthropic · Model release
Source confirmed
Frequently asked questions
How does Claude Sonnet 5 perform overall in AI benchmarks?
Claude Sonnet 5 ranks #36 out of 218 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 64.78/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 19 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Is Claude Sonnet 5 good for knowledge and understanding?
Claude Sonnet 5 ranks #4 out of 57 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 85.9/100. That places it in the current top ten for this category. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Claude Sonnet 5 good for coding and programming?
Claude Sonnet 5 ranks #9 out of 135 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 68.5/100. That places it in the current top ten for this category. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Claude Sonnet 5 good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
Claude Sonnet 5 ranks #9 out of 130 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 65.1/100. That places it in the current top ten for this category. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Claude Sonnet 5 good for multimodal and grounded tasks?
Claude Sonnet 5 has source-displayable benchmark coverage for multimodal and grounded 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 Sonnet 5 have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
No. Claude Sonnet 5 currently has 35 source-displayable rows across 437 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 Sonnet 5?
Claude Sonnet 5 has a documented context window of 1M. That figure is the maximum combined prompt and retained-conversation space reported for this exact model; it is not the maximum output length. The profile keeps output limits separate because providers often publish those limits independently.
Last updated August 14, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Watch Claude Sonnet 5 in the weekly brief
Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.