latentbrief

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Claude Opus 4.7

Claude Opus 4.7 provides superior capabilities in advanced reasoning and complex task handling, but at a significantly higher cost than Claude Sonnet 4.6.

Specs

MetricClaude Sonnet 4.6Claude Opus 4.7
Context window1M tokens1M tokens
Input $/1M tokens$3.00$5.00
Output $/1M tokens$15.00$25.00
ModalitiesText · ImageText · Image
Open weightsNoNo

How they differ

Reasoning approach

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Claude Sonnet 4.6 opts for a balanced approach, simplifying complex tasks for efficiency.

Claude Opus 4.7

Claude Opus 4.7 excels in multi-step logical reasoning and handling complex tasks with precision.

Coding

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Claude Sonnet 4.6 reliably performs straightforward coding tasks but may struggle with intricate debugging.

Claude Opus 4.7

Claude Opus 4.7 demonstrates strong capabilities in debugging and managing complex or niche frameworks.

Context handling

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Claude Sonnet 4.6 effectively processes large contexts but may overlook finer details in extended analyses.

Claude Opus 4.7

Claude Opus 4.7 better utilizes its 1,000,000-token context for detailed recall over long texts.

Cost profile

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is more cost-efficient at $3.0/1M input tokens and $15.0/1M output tokens.

Claude Opus 4.7

Claude Opus 4.7 is priced at $5.0/1M input tokens and $25.0/1M output tokens, reflecting its advanced capabilities.

Claude Sonnet 4.6 — what sets it apart

  • +Significantly lower cost, suited for budget-conscious scenarios.
  • +Faster response times optimized for efficiency.

Claude Opus 4.7 — what sets it apart

  • +Enhanced capability for advanced reasoning in detailed or multi-step logical tasks.
  • +Better support for debugging and specialized frameworks.

The critical difference lies in Claude Opus 4.7's advanced capabilities and higher costs versus Claude Sonnet 4.6's cost-efficient and faster performance.

Analysis synthesized from gpt-4o, llama-4-maverick, phi-4, etc.