GPT-4o vs Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Compare
OpenAI: GPT-4o
and
Anthropic: Claude 3.5 Sonnet
on reasoning, speed, cost, and features.
Models
COntext size
Cutoff date
I/O cost
Max output
Latency
Speed
OpenAI: GPT-4o
128000
2023-10
₳15/₳60
4096
500
80
Anthropic: Claude 3.5 Sonnet
200000
2024-04
₳18/₳90
8192
1200
45

Standard Benchmarks

OpenAI: GPT-4o
Anthropic: Claude 3.5 Sonnet
88.7
88.7
96.4
92
90
92
84.1
MMLU
GSM8K
HumanEval
TruthfulQA
GPT-4o and Claude 3.5 Sonnet represent the current pinnacle of AI capabilities, each with distinct strengths. GPT-4o excels in multimodal processing, handling text, images, and audio with impressive speed and accuracy. Its vision capabilities are particularly strong for document analysis, image understanding, and creative visual tasks. The model offers faster response times and broader API availability through OpenAI's established infrastructure. Claude 3.5 Sonnet shines in pure reasoning tasks, mathematical problem-solving, and complex analytical work. It demonstrates superior performance in coding challenges, logical reasoning benchmarks, and nuanced text analysis. Claude's context window of 200K tokens significantly exceeds GPT-4o's 128K limit, making it ideal for processing lengthy documents or maintaining extended conversations. Cost-wise, Claude 3.5 Sonnet typically offers better value for text-intensive applications, while GPT-4o's pricing reflects its multimodal capabilities. Both models support function calling and structured outputs, but GPT-4o provides more flexible deployment options including fine-tuning capabilities. For developers choosing between them, consider your primary use case: GPT-4o for multimodal applications requiring speed and visual processing, Claude 3.5 Sonnet for complex reasoning tasks requiring deep analysis and longer context retention.
Compare in AnyChat Now

Intelligence Score

OpenAI: GPT-4o
Anthropic: Claude 3.5 Sonnet
84
89

When to choose OpenAI: GPT-4o

Choose GPT-4o for multimodal applications requiring image analysis, document processing with visual elements, creative content generation, and scenarios demanding fast response times. Ideal for customer-facing applications, real-time chat systems, and projects requiring audio processing capabilities.

When to choose Anthropic: Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Select Claude 3.5 Sonnet for complex reasoning tasks, mathematical problem-solving, code analysis, research applications, and processing lengthy documents. Perfect for analytical workflows, academic research, detailed content analysis, and applications requiring extended context understanding.

Speed & Latency

Real-world performance metrics measuring response time, throughput, and stability under load.

metric
OpenAI: GPT-4o
Anthropic: Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Average latency
500
ms
1200
ms
Tokens/Second
80
45
Response Stability
Excellent
Excellent
Verdict:
GPT-4o delivers faster response times across most use cases

Cost Efficiency

Pricing per million tokens for input and output, affecting total cost of ownership for different use cases.

Pricing
OpenAI: GPT-4o
Anthropic: Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Input tokens
15 ₳nyTokens
15 ₳nyTokens
Output tokens
60 ₳nyTokens
90 ₳nyTokens
Verdict:
Claude 3.5 Sonnet offers better value for complex reasoning tasks

Integration & API Ecosystem

Developer tooling, SDK availability, and integration capabilities for production deployments.

Feature
OpenAI: GPT-4o
Anthropic: Claude 3.5 Sonnet
REST API
Official SDKs
Function Calling
Streaming Support
Multimodal Input
Open Weights
Verdict:
Claude 3.5 Sonnet offers better value for complex reasoning tasks

Related Comparisons

DeepSeek V3.1 vs Claude 3.5 Haiku

DeepSeek open-source; Claude better IDE integration.

Nova Premier 1.0 vs Grok 4 Fast

Grok excels in real-time data; Nova Premier mini is cost-effective.

DeepSeek V3.1 vs Grok 4 Fast

DeepSeek dominates logic; Grok shines in creativity.

FAQs

Which model is more accurate overall?

Both models excel in different areas. GPT-4o leads in multimodal tasks and creative applications, while Claude 3.5 Sonnet demonstrates superior accuracy in reasoning, mathematics, and analytical tasks. Overall accuracy depends on your specific use case.

How do the costs compare?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet typically offers better cost efficiency for text-only applications, while GPT-4o's pricing reflects its multimodal capabilities. Exact costs vary by usage volume and specific API endpoints, with both offering competitive enterprise pricing.

Which model is faster?

GPT-4o generally provides faster response times, especially for shorter queries and multimodal tasks. Claude 3.5 Sonnet may take longer for complex reasoning but offers more thorough analysis. Speed varies based on query complexity and current API load.

Do both models support multimodal inputs?

GPT-4o supports text, image, and audio inputs with strong multimodal capabilities. Claude 3.5 Sonnet primarily focuses on text and image inputs, with particularly strong performance in document analysis and visual reasoning tasks.

Can I test both models in AnyAPI Playground?

Yes! Both models are available in the AnyApi Playground where you can run side-by-side comparisons with your own prompts.

Try it for free in AnyChat

Experience these powerful AI models in real-time.
Compare outputs, test performance, and find the perfect model for your needs.