Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5
Anthropic · US | Anthropic · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Both are Anthropic models. Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the newer, generally stronger default; reach for Claude Opus 4.6 when a specific cost or latency profile matters more than the latest capabilities.
Claude Opus 4.6 and Claude Sonnet 5.5 are both Anthropic models, so the real question is not which lab to trust but which tier fits your workload and budget. Claude Opus 4.6 is anthropic's February 2026 flagship Opus and the first Opus-class model with a 1M-token context window, built for agentic coding and long-running professional tasks. Claude Sonnet 5.5 is anthropic's September 28, 2026 mid-tier update — same $2/$10 pricing as Sonnet 5 but a large agentic-coding jump (Terminal-Bench 4.0: 70.6% vs 10.3%). Since both come from the same lab, the comparison below focuses on the tier-and-cost trade-offs that actually separate them.
Key differences at a glance
- ▸Price: Claude Sonnet 5.5 is about 2.5× cheaper on input ($2/$10 per 1M tokens vs $5/$25 per 1M tokens) — meaningful once you are processing millions of tokens a month.
- ▸Context window: both advertise 1M (~1,500 pages). Tie on paper — test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
- ▸Recency: Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the newer model by about 8 months (released September 28, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
| Spec | Claude Opus 4.6 | Claude Sonnet 5.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic (US) | Anthropic (US) |
| Released | February 5, 2026 | September 28, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M (~1,500 pages) | 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) |
| Price (in/out) | $5/$25 per 1M tokens | $2/$10 per 1M tokens |
| Open weight? | No — API only | No — API only |
| Modalities | text, image, code | text, image, code |
| SWE-Bench Verified | 80.8% | Not published |
| MRCR v2 @ 1M | 76% | Not published |
Who wins what
Agentic coding and debugging in large codebases
Claude Opus 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6 lists agentic coding and debugging in large codebases among its strengths; Claude Sonnet 5.5 does not.
Long-running, multi-step autonomous agent tasks
Claude Opus 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6 lists long-running, multi-step autonomous agent tasks among its strengths; Claude Sonnet 5.5 does not.
Frontier multidisciplinary reasoning (leads Humanity's Last Exam)
Claude Opus 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6 lists frontier multidisciplinary reasoning (leads Humanity's Last Exam) among its strengths; Claude Sonnet 5.5 does not.
Terminal-Bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from Claude Sonnet 5's 10.3%
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Claude Opus 4.6 is comparatively weak here — superseded by newer Claude Opus 4.7 and 4.8 (now a legacy model)
Same $2/$10 per million token pricing as Sonnet 5, with cache-read price cut 50% to $0.10/MTok as of October 7, 2026
Claude Sonnet 5.5
At $2/$10 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Opus 4.6 ($5/$25 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Scores close to Opus 5.5 on several benchmarks (e.g. GDPval-AA v2.1 knowledge-work Elo) at a fraction of the cost
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Anthropic's September 28, 2026 mid-tier update — same $2/$10 pricing as Sonnet 5 but a large agentic-coding jump (Terminal-Bench 4.0: 70.6% vs 10.3%) — and it runs cheaper at $2/$10 per 1M tokens.
Lowest cost at scale
Claude Sonnet 5.5
At $2/$10 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Claude Sonnet 5.5
At $2/$10 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Opus 4.6, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Anyone whose priority is agentic coding and debugging in large codebases
→ Claude Opus 4.6
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is terminal-bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from claude sonnet 5's 10.3%
→ Claude Sonnet 5.5
That is its strongest area.
Claude Opus 4.6: where it fits
Anthropic's February 2026 flagship Opus and the first Opus-class model with a 1M-token context window, built for agentic coding and long-running professional tasks. Released February 5, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for agentic coding and debugging in large codebases, long-running, multi-step autonomous agent tasks, frontier multidisciplinary reasoning (leads Humanity's Last Exam), and economically valuable knowledge work in finance and legal (GDPval-AA).
Its trade-offs are real: superseded by newer Claude Opus 4.7 and 4.8 (now a legacy model), and top-tier per-token price, and its 1M-token context shipped as beta. At $5 in / $25 out per million tokens, it sits in the premium price band.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: where it fits
Anthropic's September 28, 2026 mid-tier update — same $2/$10 pricing as Sonnet 5 but a large agentic-coding jump (Terminal-Bench 4.0: 70.6% vs 10.3%). Released September 28, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for terminal-Bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from Claude Sonnet 5's 10.3%, same $2/$10 per million token pricing as Sonnet 5, with cache-read price cut 50% to $0.10/MTok as of October 7, 2026, scores close to Opus 5.5 on several benchmarks (e.g. GDPval-AA v2.1 knowledge-work Elo) at a fraction of the cost, and anthropic highlights stronger document/slide generation, spreadsheet work, and visual chart recognition (Chartography: 61.6%).
Its trade-offs: anthropic is explicit that Opus 5.5 'remains clearly stronger' on complex, open-ended work requiring sustained judgment, 1M-token context isn't uniformly available across every platform/plan, consistent with the rest of the 5.5 family, and mid-tier update released a week after Opus 5.5 (Sept 22) — Haiku 5.5 followed Oct 7 to complete the family. At $2 in / $10 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Because Claude Opus 4.6 and Claude Sonnet 5.5 come from the same lab (Anthropic), they share the same training philosophy and ecosystem — the decision is purely tier vs. cost. Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the more capable, more recent option; the other earns its place only when its price or latency profile fits a specific job better. Most teams should default to Claude Sonnet 5.5 and drop down only with a concrete reason.
Want both Claude Opus 4.6 and Claude Sonnet 5.5 without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
See pricingFrequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.6 or Claude Sonnet 5.5 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Claude Sonnet 5.5, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Opus 4.6 leans toward agentic coding and debugging in large codebases while Claude Sonnet 5.5 leans toward terminal-bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from claude sonnet 5's 10.3%, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or Claude Sonnet 5.5?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is cheaper — $5/$25 per 1M tokens vs $2/$10 per 1M tokens, roughly 2.5× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both advertise 1M (~1,500 pages). Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Should I upgrade from Claude Opus 4.6 to Claude Sonnet 5.5?
Since both are Anthropic models, the newer one (Claude Sonnet 5.5) is usually the better default unless you need a specific cost or latency profile from the other.
Which is newer, Claude Opus 4.6 or Claude Sonnet 5.5?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 — released September 28, 2026, about 8 months after Claude Opus 4.6.
Related comparisons
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.