o1 vs Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2
o1 comes out ahead, 49 to 44 on our weighted score, though Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 is 4.4× cheaper per token.
- Our pick
OpenAIo1
49/100- ECI141.9
- Price$15.00 / $60.00
- Context200K
AnthropicClaude Sonnet 3.5 v2
44/100- ECI133.5
- Price$3.00 / $15.00
- Context200K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
o1 is our pick
o1 is the better all-round choice, scoring 49/100 against Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 (44). It leads on capability and inputs & features. Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- Capabilityo1Capabilities Index (ECI): o1 141.9 · Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 133.5
- Lowest priceClaude Sonnet 3.5 v2Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 $6.00 · o1 $26.25 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextAbout the sameo1 200,000 · Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 200,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputso1: Text, Images, PDFs · Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2: Text, Images, PDFs
- Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | o1 | Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 68 | 57 |
| Price | 25% | 0 | 13 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 80 | 60 |
| Context window | 10% | 32 | 32 |
| Overall | 100% | 49/100 | 44/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | o1OpenAI | Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2Anthropic |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 141.9 (best) | 133.5 |
| ECI rank | #92 of 148 (best) | #119 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 76.8% (best) | 55.3% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 14.7% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 73.3% (best) | 8.5% |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 41.1% | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $15.00 | $3.00 (best) |
| Output | $60.00 | $15.00 (best) |
| Cached input | $7.50 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $26.25 | $6.00 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official OpenAI API | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 200,000 tokens | 200,000 tokens |
| Max output | 100,000 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | Yes | Yes |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yeslow · medium · high | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | o1 | — |
| API providers | 9 (best) | 1 |
| Released | Dec 5, 2024 | Oct 22, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 2023 | Apr 30, 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- o1$270.00
- Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2$60.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: o1 or Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2?
o1 is the better all-round choice, scoring 49/100 against Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 (44). It leads on capability and inputs & features. Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, o1 or Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2?
Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 is cheaper at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). o1 costs $15.00 input / $60.00 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $6.00 per million tokens for Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 versus $26.25 for o1 (4.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
o1 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): o1 141.9 (#92 of 148) and Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 133.5 (#119 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (139.7–143.1 vs 129.2–137.5), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — o1 76.8%, Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 55.3%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — o1 73.3%, Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 8.5%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for o1 and Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, o1 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
o1 and Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 share the same 200,000-token context window. Maximum output per response: o1 up to 100,000, Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
o1 accepts text, images and PDFs; Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 accepts text, images and PDFs. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
No. o1 and Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
o1 is the newest, released Dec 5, 2024. Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 came out Oct 22, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: o1 Sep 2023, Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 Apr 30, 2024.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Claude Opus 4Three-way comparison
- o1 vs Claude Opus 4Anthropic · ECI 142.7
- o1 vs DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32BDeepSeek · ECI 137.4
- o1 vs Gemini 2.0 FlashGoogle · ECI 134.7
- o1 vs Qwen3 MaxAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 142.4
- Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 vs Gemini 2.0 FlashGoogle · ECI 134.7
- Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 vs GPT-4.1OpenAI · ECI 136.8
