Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 for agentic coding — 77.2% on swe-bench verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch or computer use and gui automation (61.4% osworld at launch). Pick Llama 4 Maverick for open weights, 1m context or strong image + text understanding. Choose Llama 4 Maverick if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Claude Sonnet 4.5 if you want a managed API.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 (Anthropic) and Llama 4 Maverick (Meta) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Claude Sonnet 4.5 is september 2025's coding state of the art at $3/$15 — still supported, but 200K-capped and twice superseded. Llama 4 Maverick is meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Cost model: Llama 4 Maverick ships open weights you can self-host (hardware cost only, no per-token fee), while Claude Sonnet 4.5 is API-metered at $3/$15 per 1M tokens. Your choice depends on whether you want zero marginal cost at the price of running infrastructure.
Context window: Llama 4 Maverick holds 5× more — 1M (~1,500 pages) vs 200K (~300 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
Recency: Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the newer model by about 6 months (released September 29, 2025), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Specifications
Spec
Claude Sonnet 4.5
Llama 4 Maverick
Provider
Anthropic (US)
Meta (US)
Released
September 29, 2025
April 2025
Context window
200K (~300 pages)
1M (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)
$3/$15 per 1M tokens
Open weight (self-host / free)
Open weight?
No — API only
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, image, code
text, image, code
SWE-Bench Verified
77.2%
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Agentic coding — 77.2% on SWE-Bench Verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch: Claude Sonnet 4.5 — September 2025's coding state of the art at $3/$15 — still supported, but 200K-capped and twice superseded — and it is the newer of the two.
Computer use and GUI automation (61.4% OSWorld at launch): Claude Sonnet 4.5 — Claude Sonnet 4.5 lists computer use and GUI automation (61.4% OSWorld at launch) among its strengths; Llama 4 Maverick does not.
Long-horizon autonomy — Anthropic reported 30+ hours of sustained focus on multi-step tasks: Claude Sonnet 4.5 — Claude Sonnet 4.5 lists long-horizon autonomy — Anthropic reported 30+ hours of sustained focus on multi-step tasks among its strengths; Llama 4 Maverick does not.
Open weights, 1M context: Llama 4 Maverick — Its 1M window holds about 5× more than Claude Sonnet 4.5's 200K in a single prompt.
Strong image + text understanding: Llama 4 Maverick — Meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments — and it carries the larger 1M context.
Self-hostable: Llama 4 Maverick — Open weights make this possible at all — Claude Sonnet 4.5 is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
Lowest cost at scale: Llama 4 Maverick — Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Claude Sonnet 4.5's $3/$15 per 1M tokens.
Largest single-prompt input: Llama 4 Maverick — Its 1M window is about 5× larger than Claude Sonnet 4.5's 200K, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: Llama 4 Maverick — At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Claude Sonnet 4.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: Llama 4 Maverick — Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs: Llama 4 Maverick — Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Claude Sonnet 4.5 is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is agentic coding — 77.2% on swe-bench verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch: Claude Sonnet 4.5 — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is open weights, 1m context: Llama 4 Maverick — That is its strongest area.
Claude Sonnet 4.5: where it fits
September 2025's coding state of the art at $3/$15 — still supported, but 200K-capped and twice superseded. Released September 29, 2025 by Anthropic, it is built for agentic coding — 77.2% on SWE-Bench Verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch, computer use and GUI automation (61.4% OSWorld at launch), long-horizon autonomy — Anthropic reported 30+ hours of sustained focus on multi-step tasks, and tracking its own remaining token budget natively, which few models do.
Its trade-offs are real: superseded twice — Sonnet 4.6 and Sonnet 5 match or beat it at the same or lower price, capped at 200K since Anthropic retired its 1M beta in April 2026, while its successors ship 1M as standard, and missing the modern API surface: no adaptive thinking, no effort control, and half the max output of newer Sonnets. At $3 in / $15 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
Llama 4 Maverick: where it fits
Meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments. Released April 2025 by Meta, it is built for open weights, 1M context, strong image + text understanding, self-hostable, and 400B MoE, 17B active.
Its trade-offs: needs serious hardware to self-host, and trails closed frontier on reasoning. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. Llama 4 Maverick gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Claude Sonnet 4.5 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Llama 4 Maverick better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Llama 4 Maverick, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Sonnet 4.5 leans toward agentic coding — 77.2% on swe-bench verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch while Llama 4 Maverick leans toward open weights, 1m context, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Llama 4 Maverick?
Llama 4 Maverick is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Claude Sonnet 4.5 is API-metered at $3/$15 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
Llama 4 Maverick — 1M vs 200K, about 5× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Llama 4 Maverick together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Sonnet 4.5, Llama 4 Maverick and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Llama 4 Maverick?
Claude Sonnet 4.5 — released September 29, 2025, about 6 months after Llama 4 Maverick.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Llama 4 Maverick
Anthropic · US | Meta · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 for agentic coding — 77.2% on swe-bench verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch or computer use and gui automation (61.4% osworld at launch). Pick Llama 4 Maverick for open weights, 1m context or strong image + text understanding. Choose Llama 4 Maverick if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Claude Sonnet 4.5 if you want a managed API.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 (Anthropic) and Llama 4 Maverick (Meta) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Claude Sonnet 4.5 is september 2025's coding state of the art at $3/$15 — still supported, but 200K-capped and twice superseded. Llama 4 Maverick is meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Cost model: Llama 4 Maverick ships open weights you can self-host (hardware cost only, no per-token fee), while Claude Sonnet 4.5 is API-metered at $3/$15 per 1M tokens. Your choice depends on whether you want zero marginal cost at the price of running infrastructure.
▸Context window: Llama 4 Maverick holds 5× more — 1M (~1,500 pages) vs 200K (~300 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
▸Recency: Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the newer model by about 6 months (released September 29, 2025), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Claude Sonnet 4.5
Llama 4 Maverick
Provider
Anthropic (US)
Meta (US)
Released
September 29, 2025
April 2025
Context window
200K (~300 pages)
1M (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)
$3/$15 per 1M tokens
Open weight (self-host / free)
Open weight?
No — API only
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, image, code
text, image, code
SWE-Bench Verified
77.2%
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Agentic coding — 77.2% on SWE-Bench Verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch
Claude Sonnet 4.5
September 2025's coding state of the art at $3/$15 — still supported, but 200K-capped and twice superseded — and it is the newer of the two.
Computer use and GUI automation (61.4% OSWorld at launch)
Claude Sonnet 4.5
Claude Sonnet 4.5 lists computer use and GUI automation (61.4% OSWorld at launch) among its strengths; Llama 4 Maverick does not.
Long-horizon autonomy — Anthropic reported 30+ hours of sustained focus on multi-step tasks
Claude Sonnet 4.5
Claude Sonnet 4.5 lists long-horizon autonomy — Anthropic reported 30+ hours of sustained focus on multi-step tasks among its strengths; Llama 4 Maverick does not.
Open weights, 1M context
Llama 4 Maverick
Its 1M window holds about 5× more than Claude Sonnet 4.5's 200K in a single prompt.
Strong image + text understanding
Llama 4 Maverick
Meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments — and it carries the larger 1M context.
Self-hostable
Llama 4 Maverick
Open weights make this possible at all — Claude Sonnet 4.5 is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
Lowest cost at scale
Llama 4 Maverick
Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Claude Sonnet 4.5's $3/$15 per 1M tokens.
Largest single-prompt input
Llama 4 Maverick
Its 1M window is about 5× larger than Claude Sonnet 4.5's 200K, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Llama 4 Maverick
At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Claude Sonnet 4.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Llama 4 Maverick
Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs
→ Llama 4 Maverick
Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Claude Sonnet 4.5 is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is agentic coding — 77.2% on swe-bench verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch
→ Claude Sonnet 4.5
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is open weights, 1m context
→ Llama 4 Maverick
That is its strongest area.
Claude Sonnet 4.5: where it fits
September 2025's coding state of the art at $3/$15 — still supported, but 200K-capped and twice superseded. Released September 29, 2025 by Anthropic, it is built for agentic coding — 77.2% on SWE-Bench Verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch, computer use and GUI automation (61.4% OSWorld at launch), long-horizon autonomy — Anthropic reported 30+ hours of sustained focus on multi-step tasks, and tracking its own remaining token budget natively, which few models do.
Its trade-offs are real: superseded twice — Sonnet 4.6 and Sonnet 5 match or beat it at the same or lower price, capped at 200K since Anthropic retired its 1M beta in April 2026, while its successors ship 1M as standard, and missing the modern API surface: no adaptive thinking, no effort control, and half the max output of newer Sonnets. At $3 in / $15 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
Llama 4 Maverick: where it fits
Meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments. Released April 2025 by Meta, it is built for open weights, 1M context, strong image + text understanding, self-hostable, and 400B MoE, 17B active.
Its trade-offs: needs serious hardware to self-host, and trails closed frontier on reasoning. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. Llama 4 Maverick gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Claude Sonnet 4.5 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Want both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Llama 4 Maverick 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.
Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Llama 4 Maverick better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Llama 4 Maverick, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Sonnet 4.5 leans toward agentic coding — 77.2% on swe-bench verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch while Llama 4 Maverick leans toward open weights, 1m context, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Llama 4 Maverick?
Llama 4 Maverick is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Claude Sonnet 4.5 is API-metered at $3/$15 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
Llama 4 Maverick — 1M vs 200K, about 5× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Llama 4 Maverick together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Sonnet 4.5, Llama 4 Maverick and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Llama 4 Maverick?
Claude Sonnet 4.5 — released September 29, 2025, about 6 months after Llama 4 Maverick.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.