Enterprise DNA Enterprise DNA
Directories / Compare / Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Sonnet 5

Compare

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Sonnet 5

Intra-Anthropic routing: which Claude belongs on which step

Claude Opus 4.8 and Claude Sonnet 5 both offer 1,000,000-token context windows and the same Anthropic instruction-following profile. Opus 4.8 costs 2.5x more per output token. This comparison is the intra-Anthropic routing decision: which steps earn the Opus price and which belong on Sonnet.

Updated

The contenders

Each pick links through to its full Directories entry.

L Models

Claude Opus 4.8

by

Claude Opus 4.8 is Anthropic's most capable generally available model in the Opus family. It supports text, image, and file inputs with text output, with reasoning support and a 1M

Best for: Teams running the highest-stakes steps in a workflow: final reasoning, contract analysis, complex code generation, and decisions where output is read by a human without a programmatic gate.
Read the full entry
L Models

Claude Sonnet 5

by

Sonnet 5 is Anthropic's most capable Sonnet-class model, with frontier performance across coding, agents, and professional work. It supports adaptive thinking with selectable reaso

Best for: Teams running the high-volume steps in a workflow: drafting, classification, code scaffolding, and retrieval-augmented generation, where cost matters and output is verified downstream.
Read the full entry

Side by side

Same criteria, three answers. The verdict is opinionated and lives below the table.

Criterion Claude Opus 4.8Claude Sonnet 5
Input / output price per 1M tokens $5 / $25$2 / $10
Output cost ratio 2.5x more expensive than Sonnet 5 on output2.5x cheaper than Opus 4.8; a 10M-output-token day costs $250 on Opus 4.8, $100 on Sonnet 5
Context window 1,000,000 tokens1,000,000 tokens
Released May 27, 2026June 30, 2026
Intelligence Index (Artificial Analysis, July 2026) 55.753.4
Coding and Agentic indexes (Artificial Analysis, July 2026) Coding 74.3, Agentic 47.2Coding 71.5, Agentic 46.7
Reasoning capability Full reasoning with extended thinking. Suited for multi-step analysis with many dependencies.Selectable reasoning effort (low, medium, high, max). Adaptive thinking lets you tune compute per step, which helps manage cost on steps that do not need maximum effort.
Best workflow position Final review, contract analysis, complex code generation, and decisions where output is read without a programmatic gate.Draft generation, classification, code scaffolding, retrieval-augmented lookups, and high-volume steps where a downstream check catches mistakes.

Verdict

The two models share a 1,000,000-token context window, and Opus 4.8 leads on every benchmark: Intelligence Index 55.7 vs 53.4, Coding Index 74.3 vs 71.5, and Agentic Index 47.2 vs 46.7. The gaps are real but not large enough to justify the price difference on every step. Opus 4.8 costs $5/$25 per million tokens; Sonnet 5 costs $2/$10. Paying 2.5x more on output earns its keep only on the specific steps where that extra quality differential shows.

Claude Sonnet 5 launched June 30, 2026 and is the newer model. Anthropic built in selectable reasoning effort (low, medium, high, max), so you can tune how hard Sonnet 5 thinks on each step. A classification call at low effort is cheap and fast; a complex analysis call at max effort approaches Opus territory on tasks where reasoning depth is the variable. The adaptive thinking feature is the mechanism that partially closes the benchmark gap without paying Opus prices.

Put Sonnet 5 on every step where output is verified programmatically or where draft quality is sufficient. Put Opus 4.8 only on the steps where the quality differential is noticeable to the downstream consumer: final reasoning, contract-level analysis, complex code generation that does not run through tests, and decisions a human reads without a check. Most agent workflows have two or three Opus-class steps and many more Sonnet-class steps. Identify the Opus steps first, then route everything else to Sonnet 5.

Free Reference Card

Get the Decision Matrix

A printable one-page comparison card you can save as a PDF and share with your team.

Enter your email. We send one useful update per week. Unsubscribe any time.

Compare other matchups

More head-to-heads across the index.