whichllmmodel
Back to Dashboard

Anthropic Claude Sonnet 4.6 VS Anthropic Claude Sonnet 5

✍️ Analysis by:the whichllmmodel Editorial Team|📅 Updated: June 2026

Decision Recommendation

⚖️ Editorial Verdict: In our analysis, Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the premium intelligence choice, scoring 63.2% higher on coding benchmarks. However, this accuracy premium comes with a cost overhead: Claude Sonnet 5 is 1.5x cheaper to run. If you are building high-volume, simple chatbots or processing massive amounts of text where budget is critical, Claude Sonnet 5 offers excellent cost savings. For agentic reasoning, code refactoring, or complex logical tasks, the accuracy premium of Claude Sonnet 4.6 fully justifies the cost.
Was this recommendation helpful?
Model Specs

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)
N/A

excellent at multi-file repositories, autonomous agents, and industrial codebases

Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
79.9%

graduate-level science QA

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)
$6.00Input: $3.00 | Output: $15.00
Context Window
1M tokens
Model Specs

Claude Sonnet 5

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)
63.2%

excellent at multi-file repositories, autonomous agents, and industrial codebases

Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
N/A

graduate-level science QA

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)1.5x cheaper
$4.00Input: $2.00 | Output: $10.00
Context WindowLarger
1.05M tokens

Frequently Asked Questions about Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 5 comparison

Claude Sonnet 5 is cheaper than Claude Sonnet 4.6. Claude Sonnet 5 has a blended cost of $4.00/1M tokens, which is about 1.5x cheaper than Claude Sonnet 4.6 at $6.00/1M tokens.

Claude Sonnet 5 is better for coding tasks on this benchmark. It scores 63.2% on swe-bench-pro (excellent at multi-file repositories, autonomous agents, and industrial codebases) compared to Claude Sonnet 4.6 which scores N/A.