Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6 (2026) and Claude Sonnet 4.6 (2026) are frontier-tier reasoning models from Anthropic. Claude Opus 4.6 ships a 1m-token context window, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 ships a 1m-token context window. On MMLU PRO, Claude Opus 4.6 leads by 1.8 pts. On pricing, Claude Sonnet 4.6 costs $3/1M input tokens versus $5/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads.
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is ~67% cheaper at $3/1M; pay for Claude Opus 4.6 only for coding workflow support.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Claude Opus 4.6 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | reasoning-heavy apps, multimodal apps, and tool-calling agents | reasoning-heavy apps, multimodal apps, and tool-calling agents |
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | Coding, RAG, and Agents |
| Context window | 1m | 1m |
| Cheapest output | $25/1M tokens | $15/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 6 tracked | 6 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | MMLU PRO leader | 16 shared |
Decision tradeoffs
- Claude Opus 4.6 holds a shared-benchmark lead on MMLU PRO, ahead by 1.8 points.
- Local decision data tags Claude Opus 4.6 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 holds a shared-benchmark lead on LiveCodeBench, ahead by 9.8 points.
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $15/1M tokens.
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 uniquely exposes Computer use and Parallel agents in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Claude Sonnet 4.6 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
Claude Opus 4.6
$10,250
Cheapest tracked route/tier: Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.6
$6,150
Cheapest tracked route/tier: OpenRouter
Estimated monthly gap: $4,100. Batch, cache, alternate speed tiers, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.
Switch friction
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter, Anthropic, and AWS Bedrock; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 is $10/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 adds Computer use and Parallel agents in local capability data.
- Provider overlap exists on Anthropic, AWS Bedrock, and GCP Vertex AI; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Claude Opus 4.6 is $10/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
- Check replacement coverage for Computer use and Parallel agents before moving production traffic.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2026-02-05 | 2026-02-17 |
| Context window | 1m | 1m |
| Parameters | — | — |
| Architecture | Decoder Only | Decoder Only |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Openness | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Commercial use | Commercial use: conditional | Commercial use: conditional |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-12 | 2025-08 |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Claude Opus 4.6 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $5/1M tokens | $3/1M tokens |
| Output price | $25/1M tokens | $15/1M tokens |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Capability | Claude Opus 4.6 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | Yes | Yes |
| Multimodal | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Function calling | Yes | Yes |
| Tool use | Yes | Yes |
| Structured outputs | Yes | Yes |
| Code execution | Yes | Yes |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | No | Yes |
| Parallel agents | No | Yes |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU PRO | 89.1 | 87.3 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 80.8 | 79.6 |
| Google-Proof Q&A | 91.3 | 89.9 |
| AIME 2025 | 94.2 | 94.0 |
| LiveCodeBench | 70.2 | 80.0 |
| Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding | 76.5 | 83.6 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 53.0 | 33.2 |
| HumanEval | 95.0 | 98.0 |
| Chatbot Arena | 1501.0 | 1459.0 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 68.8 | 58.3 |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 65.4 | 59.1 |
| SWE-rebench | 65.3 | 60.7 |
| τ-bench | 84.8 | 87.5 |
| Massive Multitask Language Understanding | 91.1 | 89.3 |
| MMMU Pro | 77.3 | 75.6 |
| MCP-Atlas | 62.7 | 61.3 |
Deep dive
On shared benchmark coverage, MMLU PRO has Claude Opus 4.6 at 89.1 and Claude Sonnet 4.6 at 87.3, with Claude Opus 4.6 ahead by 1.8 points; SWE-bench Verified has Claude Opus 4.6 at 80.8 and Claude Sonnet 4.6 at 79.6, with Claude Opus 4.6 ahead by 1.2 points; Google-Proof Q&A has Claude Opus 4.6 at 91.3 and Claude Sonnet 4.6 at 89.9, with Claude Opus 4.6 ahead by 1.4 points. The largest visible gap is 1.8 points on MMLU PRO, which matters most when that benchmark mirrors your workload. Treat isolated benchmark wins as directional, because provider routing, prompt style, and tool access can move real application results.
The capability footprint is close: both models cover vision, multimodal input, reasoning mode, function calling, and tool use. That makes context budget, benchmark fit, and provider maturity more important than a simple checklist. If your application depends on one integration detail, verify it against the provider route you plan to use, not just the base model listing.
For cost, Claude Opus 4.6 lists $5/1M input and $25/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 lists $3/1M input and $15/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Claude Sonnet 4.6 lower by about $4.40 per million blended tokens. Availability is 6 providers versus 6, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose Claude Opus 4.6 when coding workflow support are central to the workload. Choose Claude Sonnet 4.6 when coding workflow support and lower input-token cost are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship.
FAQ
Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 4.6 or Claude Sonnet 4.6?
Claude Opus 4.6 supports 1m tokens, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 supports 1m tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or Claude Sonnet 4.6?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Claude Opus 4.6 costs $5/1M input and $25/1M output tokens. Claude Sonnet 4.6 costs $3/1M input and $15/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is Claude Opus 4.6 or Claude Sonnet 4.6 open source?
Claude Opus 4.6 is listed under Proprietary. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is listed under Proprietary. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.
Which is better for vision, Claude Opus 4.6 or Claude Sonnet 4.6?
Both Claude Opus 4.6 and Claude Sonnet 4.6 expose vision. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface.
Which is better for multimodal input, Claude Opus 4.6 or Claude Sonnet 4.6?
Both Claude Opus 4.6 and Claude Sonnet 4.6 expose multimodal input. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface.
Where can I run Claude Opus 4.6 and Claude Sonnet 4.6?
Claude Opus 4.6 is available on Anthropic, AWS Bedrock, GCP Vertex AI, Microsoft Foundry, and OpenRouter. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is available on OpenRouter, Anthropic, AWS Bedrock, GCP Vertex AI, and Microsoft Foundry. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-06-15. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.