Home/Compare/GPT-4o vs Claude 3.5 Sonnet

GPT-4o vs Claude 3.5 Sonnet

GPT-4o for newer model with multimodal improvements, Claude 3.5 Sonnet for proven reliability at a lower price point.

Pricing source: live OpenRouter model catalog (`/api/v1/models`).

Model A

GPT-4o

OpenAIMultimodal
Context Window128K
Knowledge CutoffUnknown
Open model page
Model B

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

AnthropicText + Vision
Context Window200K
Knowledge CutoffUnknown
Open model page

Editorial Verdict

GPT-4o is the highest capability option; Claude 3.5 Sonnet is the best value for most production workloads.

GPT-4o outperforms Claude 3.5 Sonnet on most benchmarks, but the gap is smaller than the model names suggest. Claude 3.5 Sonnet is significantly cheaper and faster while delivering 90% of GPT-4o's capability on typical tasks. For cost-sensitive applications, Claude 3.5 Sonnet is the winner. For maximum quality on the hardest tasks, GPT-4o leads.

GPT-4o
  • Higher benchmark scores on reasoning, coding, and multimodal tasks
  • Mature API with more consistent function calling and JSON mode behavior
  • Stronger on complex, multi-step reasoning tasks requiring deep analysis

Best for: Maximum quality requirements and complex multimodal production applications

Claude 3.5 Sonnet
  • Significantly lower cost per token, making high-volume applications economically viable
  • Excellent coding performance with strong repository-level understanding
  • Fast inference with reliable response quality for everyday production workloads

Best for: Cost-sensitive production applications and teams prioritizing price-to-performance

Pricing sourced from OpenRouter — updates as their catalog changes.

Pricing Comparison

All values pull from OpenRouter and update as their catalog changes.

MetricGPT-4oClaude 3.5 SonnetWinner
Input (per 1M tokens)CustomCustomN/A
Output (per 1M tokens)CustomCustomN/A
Request feeN/AN/AN/A
Image feeN/AN/AN/A

Cost Estimator

Estimate monthly billing using real OpenRouter prices.

GPT-4o Total

Variable

Claude 3.5 Sonnet Total

Variable
Savings unavailable (pricing not published for one model).

Capability Signals

Scores are directional estimates from model metadata — not official benchmark results.

GPT-4oMMLU Signal (Reasoning)Claude 3.5 Sonnet
69%
69%
GPT-4oHumanEval Signal (Coding)Claude 3.5 Sonnet
69%
69%
GPT-4oAgentic Tooling SignalClaude 3.5 Sonnet
69%
69%
GPT-4oMultimodal SignalClaude 3.5 Sonnet
69%
78%

Capabilities Matrix

Feature highlights for architecture and production fit.

GPT-4o Strengths

  • Balanced general-purpose profile for chat, extraction, and automation tasks.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet Strengths

  • Supports image inputs for multimodal analysis workflows.
  • Large context window for long documents and codebases.
  • Balanced general-purpose profile for chat, extraction, and automation tasks.

API Implementation

Quick start snippets for each provider style.

OpenAI (Python)

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI()
response = client.chat.completions.create(
  model="openai/gpt-4o",
  messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}]
)

print(response.choices[0].message.content)

Anthropic (Python)

import anthropic

client = anthropic.Anthropic()

message = client.messages.create(
  model="anthropic/claude-3.5-sonnet",
  max_tokens=1024,
  messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}]
)

print(message.content)

Choose GPT-4o when...

  • You want a balanced default for mixed chat and workflow automation workloads.
  • You can measure quality with your own benchmark and prompt set.

Choose Claude 3.5 Sonnet when...

  • Your application includes visual reasoning and image understanding tasks.
  • You process large documents or code repositories in a single prompt.
  • You want a balanced default for mixed chat and workflow automation workloads.

Frequently Asked Questions

Practical checks before selecting a production model.

Which model is better for coding?

Coding preference depends on your stack and tool-calling needs. Compare the coding signal row, test with your repository tasks, and validate latency in your target region.

Which model is cheaper at scale?

Input and output token pricing can diverge by workload profile. Use the estimator with your monthly request count and token mix to get a realistic cost difference.

Are these official benchmark numbers?

Pricing is live from OpenRouter. Benchmark rows are ModelsAtlas metadata-based signals and should be treated as directional guidance, not official leaderboard scores.

Related Comparisons

Explore adjacent model matchups.