GEM-4C 558 -4%
GPT-61S 555 -3.8%
CL-SN55 553 -3.8%
CL-OP55 551 -4%
GPT-61TERR 547 -3.5%
GEM-4CM 546 -4%
CL-OP55EH 542 -3.9%
GPT-61SOLXH 541 -3.6%
GPT-61SOLH 527 -3.7%
CL-SN55XH 523 -3.5%
GEM-4CL 520 -3.9%
GPT-61TERRXH 507 -3.4%
CL-OP55H 506 -4%
GPT-61SOLM 500 -3.5%
KIMI-K31P 499 -3.5%
GEM-4AR 498 -3.9%
GPT-61TERRH 490 -3.2%
CL-OP55M 483 -3.6%
MUSE-WONDFUL 479 -3.8%
CL-SN55H 467 -3.3%
CL-HK55 463 -2.9%
GPT-61TERRM 462 -3.1%
GPT-6A 451 -4.7%
MUSE-WOND 451 -3.6%
CL-HK55XH 450 -3%
GPT-6ASTRXH 440 -4.8%
GROK-47 440 -3.1%
GROK-47H 438 -2.9%
GPT-6ASTRH 437 -4.8%
DSK-V-340615 436 -2.9%
QWEN-38X 428 -2.9%
GPT-61SOLL 423 -3.2%
GLM-53 420 -3%
MIMO-V26P 420 -2.6%
CL-HK55H 419 -2.8%
LING-31F1019 417 -2.6%
GEM-38F 416 -2.8%
GPT-6ASTRM 415 -4.6%
MMAX-M31F 414 -2.8%
GEM-38FM 412 -2.8%
GPT-61TERRNO 411 -2.8%
GROK-47L 410 -2.8%
DSK-V-3E48BD 410 -2.6%
GPT-6L 407 -2.6%
GLM-53F 407 -2.6%
STEP-5 405 -2.6%
CL-FABL51XH 403 -4.7%
GPT-61TERRL 403 -2.9%
MIMO-V26F 401 -2.4%
CL-FABL51 399 -4.5%
CL-SN55M 395 -2.9%
CL-OP55L 393 -3.4%
MIST-LARG4 390 -2.7%
CL-FABL51H 386 -4.5%
CL-HK55M 386 -2.3%
GPT-6LUNAXH 377 -2.6%
MUSE-SPAROPE 375 -2.6%
MIST-LARG4M 371 -2.4%
DSK-V4P 365 -2.4%
GPT-6LUNAH 365 -2.1%
GLM-53L 364 -2.4%
CL-SN55L 362 -2.7%
GEM-38FL 361 -2.4%
GPT-6ASTRL 359 -4.5%
CL-FABL51M 359 -4.5%
QWEN-827B 349 -2.2%
CL-HK55L 347 -2%
MMAX-M3 345 -2%
GPT-6LUNAM 344 -2.3%
DSK-V-02811D 344 -2%
K2-HORI375BA 342 -2%
REFL-BEAM 338 -2%
QWEN-827BM 332 -1.8%
CL-FABL51L 329 -4.4%
QWEN-827BL 320 -1.8%
NEMO-35SUPEV 313 -1.9%
INKL 295 -1.7%
NVID-NEMO3UL 295 -1.3%
GEM-35FLITE 295 -1.3%
GPT-6LUNAL 287 -1.4%
GPT-6LUNANON 286 -1%
NANB-333B 285 -2.7%
QWEN-827BNON 282 -1.4%
COMM-APLUS 266 -1.1%
MUSE-GLIM 263 -1.1%
NEMO-35LIGH 261 -0.8%
GRAN-428B 258 -0.8%
MIST-SMAL4 252 -0.4%
INKL-SM 235 -2.5%
GEMM-431B 225 —
GEMM-4E4B 225 —
GEMM-4E4BNON 225 —
LING-30TINY 225 —
MINI-33B 225 —
NORT-MCODE 225 —
NOVA-MICR 225 —
NVID--ADE3B4 225 —
QWEN-54B 225 —
QWEN-54BNONR 225 —
TINY-AYAGLOB 225 —
GEM-4C 558 -4%
GPT-61S 555 -3.8%
CL-SN55 553 -3.8%
CL-OP55 551 -4%
GPT-61TERR 547 -3.5%
GEM-4CM 546 -4%
CL-OP55EH 542 -3.9%
GPT-61SOLXH 541 -3.6%
GPT-61SOLH 527 -3.7%
CL-SN55XH 523 -3.5%
GEM-4CL 520 -3.9%
GPT-61TERRXH 507 -3.4%
CL-OP55H 506 -4%
GPT-61SOLM 500 -3.5%
KIMI-K31P 499 -3.5%
GEM-4AR 498 -3.9%
GPT-61TERRH 490 -3.2%
CL-OP55M 483 -3.6%
MUSE-WONDFUL 479 -3.8%
CL-SN55H 467 -3.3%
CL-HK55 463 -2.9%
GPT-61TERRM 462 -3.1%
GPT-6A 451 -4.7%
MUSE-WOND 451 -3.6%
CL-HK55XH 450 -3%
GPT-6ASTRXH 440 -4.8%
GROK-47 440 -3.1%
GROK-47H 438 -2.9%
GPT-6ASTRH 437 -4.8%
DSK-V-340615 436 -2.9%
QWEN-38X 428 -2.9%
GPT-61SOLL 423 -3.2%
GLM-53 420 -3%
MIMO-V26P 420 -2.6%
CL-HK55H 419 -2.8%
LING-31F1019 417 -2.6%
GEM-38F 416 -2.8%
GPT-6ASTRM 415 -4.6%
MMAX-M31F 414 -2.8%
GEM-38FM 412 -2.8%
GPT-61TERRNO 411 -2.8%
GROK-47L 410 -2.8%
DSK-V-3E48BD 410 -2.6%
GPT-6L 407 -2.6%
GLM-53F 407 -2.6%
STEP-5 405 -2.6%
CL-FABL51XH 403 -4.7%
GPT-61TERRL 403 -2.9%
MIMO-V26F 401 -2.4%
CL-FABL51 399 -4.5%
CL-SN55M 395 -2.9%
CL-OP55L 393 -3.4%
MIST-LARG4 390 -2.7%
CL-FABL51H 386 -4.5%
CL-HK55M 386 -2.3%
GPT-6LUNAXH 377 -2.6%
MUSE-SPAROPE 375 -2.6%
MIST-LARG4M 371 -2.4%
DSK-V4P 365 -2.4%
GPT-6LUNAH 365 -2.1%
GLM-53L 364 -2.4%
CL-SN55L 362 -2.7%
GEM-38FL 361 -2.4%
GPT-6ASTRL 359 -4.5%
CL-FABL51M 359 -4.5%
QWEN-827B 349 -2.2%
CL-HK55L 347 -2%
MMAX-M3 345 -2%
GPT-6LUNAM 344 -2.3%
DSK-V-02811D 344 -2%
K2-HORI375BA 342 -2%
REFL-BEAM 338 -2%
QWEN-827BM 332 -1.8%
CL-FABL51L 329 -4.4%
QWEN-827BL 320 -1.8%
NEMO-35SUPEV 313 -1.9%
INKL 295 -1.7%
NVID-NEMO3UL 295 -1.3%
GEM-35FLITE 295 -1.3%
GPT-6LUNAL 287 -1.4%
GPT-6LUNANON 286 -1%
NANB-333B 285 -2.7%
QWEN-827BNON 282 -1.4%
COMM-APLUS 266 -1.1%
MUSE-GLIM 263 -1.1%
NEMO-35LIGH 261 -0.8%
GRAN-428B 258 -0.8%
MIST-SMAL4 252 -0.4%
INKL-SM 235 -2.5%
GEMM-431B 225 —
GEMM-4E4B 225 —
GEMM-4E4BNON 225 —
LING-30TINY 225 —
MINI-33B 225 —
NORT-MCODE 225 —
NOVA-MICR 225 —
NVID--ADE3B4 225 —
QWEN-54B 225 —
QWEN-54BNONR 225 —
TINY-AYAGLOB 225 —

Delayed ticker data. Last calculated 5 Nov 2026, 11:04 pm Sydney time.

← Back to feed

Sonnet 5 Costs 15% More Per Task Than Opus 4.8, Despite Cheaper Per-Token Pricing

Artificial Analysis published its independent analysis of Claude Sonnet 5 on June 30, the same day Anthropic shipped the model, and the headline number is counterintuitive: at standard pricing, Sonnet 5 costs more per task than the Opus 4.8 it is supposed to undercut.

The AA Intelligence Index puts Sonnet 5 at 53 on max effort — the same score as GPT-5.5 with high reasoning, two to three points behind Opus 4.8 max and GPT-5.5 xhigh, and six points above Sonnet 4.6. That makes Sonnet 5 the fifth-ranked model globally by AA’s quality composite.

The Token Economics Problem

The per-token pricing looks straightforward: Sonnet 5 at $3 input / $15 output is 40% cheaper on output than Opus 4.8 ($5 input / $25 output). But the model doesn’t use the same number of tokens to complete tasks.

On max effort, Sonnet 5 uses approximately 40% more output tokens per AA Intelligence Index task than Sonnet 4.6. On the AA-Briefcase knowledge-work benchmark and GDPval-AA, it uses roughly 3x as many agentic turns as its predecessor. AA computed the fully-loaded cost per Intelligence Index task at standard pricing: Sonnet 5 runs $2.29, Opus 4.8 runs $1.99 — a 15% premium for the model that costs less per token.

This is the core tension in effort-based pricing. The effort dial is a capability dial, but it is also a spend dial. A model that defaults to high-effort problem-solving generates more output tokens than a model that satisfices. When pricing per token, the savings from a lower rate can be consumed entirely by a higher rate of token generation.

What the Promotional Window Changes

Anthropic is offering $2 input / $10 output through August 31, 2026 — a one-third reduction on both sides. At that rate, the per-task math inverts: Sonnet 5 becomes meaningfully cheaper than Opus 4.8 for most workloads. AA’s analysis uses standard pricing throughout, so the promotional discount is additive.

After September 1, the choice becomes more deliberate. Developers building agentic pipelines who need max-effort performance will need to decide whether Sonnet 5’s quality tier ($2.29/task at standard) justifies the premium over Opus 4.8 ($1.99/task), or whether they route to lower effort levels where Sonnet 5 is genuinely cheaper.

The effort system now has five levels on both Sonnet 5 and Opus 4.8: low, medium, high, xhigh, and max. Sonnet 5 adds xhigh to the prior four Sonnet 4.6 settings. AA’s data shows that performance scales meaningfully with effort on Sonnet 5 — the gap between low and max effort is roughly 6x in turn count on GDPval-AA.

Benchmark Numbers

On tasks where Sonnet 5 directly competes with Opus 4.8, the results are close:

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1: Sonnet 5 at 80.4%, Sonnet 4.6 at 67.0%, Opus 4.8 at 82.7%
  • SWE-bench Pro: Sonnet 5 at 63.2%, Sonnet 4.6 at 58.1%, Opus 4.8 at 69.2%
  • Humanity’s Last Exam (with tools): Sonnet 5 at 57.4%, Opus 4.8 at 57.9%
  • OSWorld-Verified: Sonnet 5 at 81.2%, Opus 4.8 at 83.4%
  • GDPval-AA v2: Sonnet 5 at 1,618, Opus 4.8 at 1,615

The GDPval-AA v2 result is the outlier: Sonnet 5 leads on agentic knowledge work despite being the smaller model. AA-Briefcase shows the same pattern. For reasoning-intensive tasks — the CritPt physics benchmark and comparable heavy-reasoning evals — Opus 4.8 maintains a meaningful gap, with Sonnet 5 trailing GLM-5.2, Opus 4.8, and Fable 5.

What This Changes for Developers

The launch article framed Sonnet 5 as a 7.5x output-cost saving versus Opus 4.8 at introductory pricing. That is accurate at the per-token level. It is less accurate at the per-task level, where the real cost depends on how many tokens the model generates per completed task — a number that varies significantly by effort setting, workload type, and model behavior.

AA’s analysis supports using Sonnet 5 for agentic knowledge work, where it matches or beats Opus 4.8. For reasoning-intensive benchmarks and coding at the frontier, Opus 4.8 and Fable 5 maintain a clear lead. The promotional window through August 31 makes Sonnet 5 the obvious choice for volume workloads regardless of task type. The calculus after September 1 is more nuanced.

Context window: 1 million tokens. Cache pricing: $3.75/M for cache writes (25% premium), $0.30/M for cache hits (90% discount). 5-minute TTL.