Strong coding and instruction-following for agents.
Model details →Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Claude Opus 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6 wins on 2 of 6 axes — pricing and capability skew in its favour for most workloads.
Still available; Anthropic recommends migrating toward Opus 4.7 for latest improvements.
Model details →Side-by-side comparison
| Capability | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Claude Opus 4.6 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Context window Maximum number of input tokens the model can attend to in a single request. | 200K | 1M | 🏆 Claude Opus 4.6 |
| Input price (per 1M) Cost per million input tokens billed by the provider. | Custom | Custom | — |
| Output price (per 1M) Cost per million output tokens billed by the provider. | Custom | Custom | — |
| Tool / function calling First-class support for emitting structured tool calls. | — | — | Tie |
| Vision input Accepts image inputs alongside text. | — | Yes | 🏆 Claude Opus 4.6 |
| Reasoning mode Internal chain-of-thought / extended-thinking support. | — | — | Tie |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet better than Claude Opus 4.6?
Claude Opus 4.6 wins on 2 of 6 axes — pricing and capability skew in its favour for most workloads.
What's the price difference between Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Claude Opus 4.6?
Input: Custom vs Custom per 1M tokens. Output: Custom vs Custom per 1M tokens.
What context windows do Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Claude Opus 4.6 support?
Claude 3.7 Sonnet supports up to 200K tokens. Claude Opus 4.6 supports up to 1M tokens.
Do both Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Claude Opus 4.6 support tool calling?
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: not advertised. Claude Opus 4.6: not advertised.