# Claude Opus 5 vs Claude Sonnet 5

> Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.7 to 54.5 on the Noometry Index. Claude Sonnet 5 costs 2.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-5-vs-claude-sonnet-5
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 47

## Summary

- They share 47 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5 scores higher in 10 categories and Claude Sonnet 5 in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 5 leads 77.1 to 48.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath Tier 4: 73.2% for Claude Opus 5 and 29.3% for Claude Sonnet 5.
- Claude Sonnet 5 is cheaper at $2 / $10 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 5.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 5 | Claude Sonnet 5 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Anthropic |
| Noometry Index | 67.7 | 54.5 |
| Rank | 4 | 26 |
| Context | 1M | 1M |
| Input $/M | $5 | $2 |
| Output $/M | $25 | $10 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 5: 67.0 (#5)
- Claude Sonnet 5: 55.5 (#20)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Claude Sonnet 5 |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | 73.6% | 53.8% |
| FrontierCode | 53.4% | 42.7% |
| CursorBench | 46.6% | 34.1% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1694 | 1540 |
| SciCode | 56.4% | 53.6% |
| WeirdML | 91.8% | 68.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1533 | 1483 |
| ALE-Bench | 2,165 | 1,463 |
| FrontierSWE | 52% | — |
| GSO | — | 37.3% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 5: 55.5 (#1)
- Claude Sonnet 5: 42.7 (#16)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Claude Sonnet 5 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 65.8% | 54.5% |
| GBAEval | 79.6% | 65.3% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 11,182 | 6,378 |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 31.4% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 48.7% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 35% | — |
| BALROG | 63.4% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 24% | — |
| LMArena Search | — | 1194 |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 5: 77.1 (#3)
- Claude Sonnet 5: 48.2 (#37)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Claude Sonnet 5 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 80.6% | 60.6% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 94.3% | 75.1% |
| CritPt | 29.1% | 16.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | 42% | 35% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1525 | 1461 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 59% | 35% |
| DTBench | 97.9% | 92.5% |
| LMCA | 64.5% | 50% |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.12 | 0.14 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 162.67 | 156.34 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 90.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 45.7% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 60% |
| ForecastBench | — | 61.1 |

## Math

- Claude Opus 5: 86.1 (#6)
- Claude Sonnet 5: 66.1 (#21)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Claude Sonnet 5 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 85.6% | 65.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 73.2% | 29.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.9% | 94.7% |
| ProofBench | 99% | 77% |
| LMArena Math | 1533 | 1467 |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 5: 66.8 (#8)
- Claude Sonnet 5: 55.7 (#42)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Claude Sonnet 5 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 93.9% | 90.5% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 59.9% | 33.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1558 | 1491 |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 5: 51.1 (#6)
- Claude Sonnet 5: 42.4 (#26)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Claude Sonnet 5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1321 | 1275 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 30.4% | 24.9% |
| LMArena Document | 1516 | 1466 |
| Furniture Assembly | 60.8% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 5: 58.8 (#3)
- Claude Sonnet 5: 54.0 (#55)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Claude Sonnet 5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1500 | 1431 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1575 | 1475 |
| LMArena French | 1522 | 1457 |
| LMArena German | 1522 | 1448 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1510 | 1422 |
| LMArena Korean | 1526 | 1411 |
| LMArena Russian | 1507 | 1452 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1519 | 1436 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 5: 79.3 (#5)
- Claude Sonnet 5: 76.6 (#39)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Claude Sonnet 5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1516 | 1453 |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 5: 46.5 (#20)
- Claude Sonnet 5: 44.8 (#53)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Claude Sonnet 5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1516 | 1464 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 5: 79.3 (#2)
- Claude Sonnet 5: 69.4 (#24)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Claude Sonnet 5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1506 | 1443 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1491 | 1416 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2133 | 1794 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1385 | 1236 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1496 | 1454 |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 5 better than Claude Sonnet 5?

Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.7 to 54.5 on the Noometry Index. Claude Sonnet 5 costs 2.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5 or Claude Sonnet 5?

Claude Sonnet 5 is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $10 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5 lists at $5 and $25.

### Is Claude Opus 5 or Claude Sonnet 5 better for coding?

Claude Opus 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 67.0 versus 55.5 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5 and Claude Sonnet 5 share?

47 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5 has 57 scored results on Noometry and Claude Sonnet 5 has 51.