BenchLeader

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5

Verdict
  • Claude Sonnet 5.5 (max) leads on quality: 67.6 vs 63.1.
  • Claude Opus 4.6 is stronger in human preference, multimodal.
  • Claude Sonnet 5.5 (max) is stronger in agents & tools, coding, maths, reasoning, composite, knowledge, long context.
  • Claude Sonnet 5.5 (max) is 2.5× cheaper ($4.00 vs $10.00 per 1M blended).
  • Claude Sonnet 5.5 (max) streams 3.5× faster (141 vs 40 tokens per second).
MetricClaude Opus 4.6Claude Sonnet 5.5 (max)
BenchLeader Index63.167.6
Agents & tools score68.969.5
Coding score60.169.8
Human preference score64.4–
Maths score68.072.9
Multimodal score66.4–
Reasoning score62.081.1
Composite score–72.6
Knowledge score–65.4
Long context score–66.6
Blended price $/M$10.00$4.00
Output speed40 tok/s141 tok/s
Time to first answer1.6 s487.1 s
Context window1M1M
GPQA Diamond90.5%95.6%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3–88.8%
FrontierMath Tier 4–80.5%
OTIS Mock AIME94.4%100.0%
SWE-bench Verified (Epoch)78.7%–
SimpleQA Verified–46.5%
Humanity's Last Exam19.0%–
Terminal-Bench79.8%61.8%
SimpleBench67.6%–
SciCode–61.0%
Cybench93.0%–
Remote Labor Index4.2%–
WeirdML77.9%–
APEX-Agents–75.5%
FrontierCode26.6%–
ProofBench–100.0%
GSO-Bench33.3%–
Epoch Capabilities Index155.2–
LMArena Text1498–
LMArena Hard Prompts1527–
LMArena Coding1548–
LMArena WebDev1537–
LMArena Vision1313–
LMArena Agent–12
LiveBench–75.7%
LiveBench Reasoning–91.6%
LiveBench Coding–91.4%
LiveBench Agentic Coding–56.3%
LiveBench Mathematics–96.1%
LiveBench Data Analysis–59.5%
LiveBench Language–78.0%
LiveBench Instruction Following–56.8%
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2–56
AA-LCR–82.7%
AA-Omniscience–32.3
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)–55.0%
SciCode (AA)–61.0%
HiL-Bench38.3%–
EQ-Bench 41223–
Kagi LLM Benchmark72.4%–
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)75.6%–
SWE-bench Verified (any scaffold)75.6%–
CritPt–31.4%
GDPval-AA v2.1–67.0%
Analyst Agent (AA)–57.5%
MedCode48.2%–
MedScribe86.7%–
Vibe Code Bench v1.157.6%–
SWE Atlas: Codebase QnA33.3%–
SWE Atlas: Refactoring35.6%–
SWE Atlas: Test Writing36.7%–
LMArena Maths1507–
LMArena Creative Writing1479–
LMArena Instruction Following1500–
LMArena Multi-turn1512–
LMArena Longer Queries1517–
LMArena Document1494–
Chess Puzzles17.0%–
Mystery Game Puzzles15.0%65.0%
CL-bench20.7%–
CL-bench Life13.6%–
METR Time Horizons78.9%–
ForecastBench60.0%–
CursorBench–55.5%
GBAEval44.1%–
ALE-Bench996.5–
Vending-Bench 28017.6–
FrontierSWE–61.9%
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)–63.6%
AutomationBench–71.8%
GDP.pdf–25.8%
MLCR–75.0%
Harvey LAB–2.8%
AA-Omniscience: accuracy–54.0%
AA-Omniscience: non-hallucination–53.0%
AA-Briefcase v1.1–1823

Data as of 2026-10-11. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5: questions

Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Claude Sonnet 5.5?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 (max) leads on quality: 67.6 vs 63.1. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Sonnet 5.5 (max) is ahead overall as of 2026-10-11, but check the category scores for your use.
Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Claude Sonnet 5.5 for coding?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher in coding (70 vs 60 on the category index, where 50 is average).
Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Claude Sonnet 5.5 for agentic tasks?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher in agentic tasks (70 vs 69 on the category index, where 50 is average).
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or Claude Sonnet 5.5?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is cheaper: $4.00 against $10.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
Which is faster, Claude Opus 4.6 or Claude Sonnet 5.5?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 streams faster: 141 against 40 output tokens per second.
Which has the larger context window?
Both accept 1M tokens of context.