Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
Context windowHow much text the model can hold in mind at once — your question, any documents you attach, the conversation so far, and its own reply. Go past it and the earliest part falls out of view. | — | 128k |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | — | $2.50 |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | — | $10.00 |
Cached input priceA reduced rate for text you send over and over. If every request starts with the same instructions or the same document, the provider keeps a copy ready and charges less to read it again. | — | $1.25 |
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | — | $2.50Azure |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | — | $10.00Azure |
| — | $1,000OpenAI list price | |
| Benchmarks | ||
BullshitBench v2Nonsense detection — Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 46% | 12% |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 59.4% | 49.9% |
SWE-Bench VerifiedCoding — Real coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | 33.4% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Release date | Jun 20 2024 | May 13 2024 |
| Access | Closed | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Claude 3.5 SonnetvsGemini 4 ArgonGPT-4ovsGemini 4 ArgonClaude 3.5 SonnetvsMuse WonderGPT-4ovsMuse WonderClaude 3.5 SonnetvsGrok 4.7GPT-4ovsGrok 4.7Claude 3.5 SonnetvsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashGPT-4ovsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashClaude 3.5 SonnetvsMistral Large 4GPT-4ovsMistral Large 4Claude 3.5 SonnetvsKimi K3GPT-4ovsKimi K3Frequently asked questions
Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads GPT-4o on 2 of the 2 benchmarks they both report (BullshitBench v2, GPQA Diamond). Only GPT-4o has a verified first-party API price: $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens. No pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for Claude 3.5 Sonnet. GPT-4o shipped 38 days before Claude 3.5 Sonnet, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On BullshitBench v2, Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads at 46% vs GPT-4o at 12%. On GPQA Diamond, Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads at 59.4% vs GPT-4o at 49.9%.