Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026

Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs OpenAI: o1 benchmark

Name: Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs OpenAI: o1 AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares Claude 3.5 Sonnet (Anthropic) and OpenAI: o1 (OpenAI) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 16, 2026. On preference Elo, OpenAI: o1 is ahead by 232 points (1,512 vs 1,280; seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). On SWE-bench coding, Claude 3.5 Sonnet resolves 49% versus 48.9% (seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). Claude 3.5 Sonnet streams faster (80 tok/s) while Claude 3.5 Sonnet is the cheaper output token ($15/1M). Claude 3.5 Sonnet has the larger context window (200k tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Share Analysis:

WhatsApp Telegram X / Post LinkedIn Reddit

Anthropic

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

2024 workhorse. Still a high-intent compare against GPT-4o.

Elo 1,280$15/1M out

OpenAI

OpenAI: o1

Auto-discovered from OpenRouter (openai/o1). Preview until a second source matches.

Elo 1,512$60/1M out

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A

Model B

Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet (5)vsOpenAI: o1 (4)

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 5W (56%)Overall: Claude 3.5 SonnetOpenAI: o1: 4W (44%)

← Claude 3.5 Sonnet1 tiesOpenAI: o1 →

OpenAI: o1 (4/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,280vs1,512

Coding Elo

—vs1,485

SWE-bench

49%vs48.9%

LiveBench

52.1%vs65.4%

GPQA Diamond

65%vs78%

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 1WOpenAI: o1: 4W

Claude 3.5 Sonnet (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

80 tok/svs45 tok/s

Time to first token

280 msvs420 ms

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 2WOpenAI: o1: 0W

Claude 3.5 Sonnet (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$15/1Mvs$60/1M

Input price

$3/1Mvs$15/1M

Context window

200kvs200k

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 2WOpenAI: o1: 0W

Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Dimensional AdvantageOpenAI: o1 3/6

Preference Elo

OpenAI: o1

232 pts advantage

Throughput Speed

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

35 tok/s faster

Price Efficiency

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

$45.00/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Elo

High is better

1,280

EloHigh is better

1,512+18%

Code Elo

High is better

—

Code EloHigh is better

1,485

LiveBench

High is better

52.1%

LiveBenchHigh is better

65.4%+26%

SWE-bench

High is better

49%

SWE-benchHigh is better

48.9%

GPQA

High is better

65%

GPQAHigh is better

78%+20%

TTFT

Low is better

+50%280 ms

TTFTLow is better

420 ms

Speed

High is better

+78%80 tok/s

SpeedHigh is better

45 tok/s

In $

Low is better

+400%$3/1M

In $Low is better

$15/1M

Out $

Low is better

+300%$15/1M

Out $Low is better

$60/1M

Context

High is better

200k

ContextHigh is better

200k

Interactive Simulator

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs based on published $/1M tokens.

Save up to 77% with Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo

Quick Presets:

Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out

RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)

Claude 3.5 Sonnet$330.00 / mo

In: $105.00Out: $225.00

OpenAI: o1$1,425.00 / mo

In: $525.00Out: $900.00

Estimated Cost Delta

Claude 3.5 Sonnet is estimated to save $1,095.00/month ($13,140/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

1
Claude 3.5 Sonnet:Pick Claude 3.5 Sonnet when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
2
Claude 3.5 Sonnet:Pick Claude 3.5 Sonnet when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.
3
OpenAI: o1:Pick OpenAI: o1 as the default general assistant.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsClaude 3.5 Sonnet

Higher SWE-bench (49%).

High-volume chatClaude 3.5 Sonnet

Lower output list price ($15/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIClaude 3.5 Sonnet

Lower TTFT (280 ms).

Long-document RAGClaude 3.5 Sonnet

Larger window (200k).

Screenshots / visionOpenAI: o1

Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (OpenAI: o1).

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Claude 3.5 Sonnet	Higher SWE-bench (49%).
High-volume chat	Claude 3.5 Sonnet	Lower output list price ($15/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Claude 3.5 Sonnet	Lower TTFT (280 ms).
Long-document RAG	Claude 3.5 Sonnet	Larger window (200k).
Screenshots / vision	OpenAI: o1	Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (OpenAI: o1).

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/claude-3-5-sonnet-vs-o1/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

Anthropic

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Elo 1,280

LiveBench52.1%

SWE-bench49%

Speed80 tok/s

Output cost$15/1M

OpenAI

OpenAI: o1

Elo 1,512

LiveBench65.4%

SWE-bench48.9%

Speed45 tok/s

Output cost$60/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or OpenAI: o1?: OpenAI: o1 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,512). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or OpenAI: o1?: Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads SWE-bench at 49% vs 48.9%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: Claude 3.5 Sonnet output tokens are $15/1M versus $60/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or OpenAI: o1?: Claude 3.5 Sonnet has the lower time-to-first-token (280 ms vs 420 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?: Claude 3.5 Sonnet accepts 200k tokens versus 200k.
Can I self-host either model?: Neither model is marked open-weights here. You are comparing hosted APIs.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?: No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?: Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude 3.5 Sonnet and OpenAI: o1 Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Claude 3.5 Sonnet matchups →|All OpenAI: o1 matchups →

Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet (next sonnet)OpenAI: o1 vs GPT-4o (previous gpt-flagship)OpenAI: o1 vs GPT-4.5 Orion (next gpt-flagship)Claude Opus 4.5 vs OpenAI: o1 Claude Opus 4.6 vs OpenAI: o1 Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs OpenAI: o1

Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs OpenAI: o1 benchmark

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet (5)vsOpenAI: o1 (4)

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 5W (56%)Overall: Claude 3.5 SonnetOpenAI: o1: 4W (44%)

← Claude 3.5 Sonnet1 tiesOpenAI: o1 →

OpenAI: o1 (4/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,280vs1,512

Coding Elo

—vs1,485

SWE-bench

49%vs48.9%

LiveBench

52.1%vs65.4%

GPQA Diamond

65%vs78%

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 1WOpenAI: o1: 4W

Claude 3.5 Sonnet (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

80 tok/svs45 tok/s

Time to first token

280 msvs420 ms

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 2WOpenAI: o1: 0W

Claude 3.5 Sonnet (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$15/1Mvs$60/1M

Input price

$3/1Mvs$15/1M

Context window

200kvs200k

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 2WOpenAI: o1: 0W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsClaude 3.5 Sonnet

Higher SWE-bench (49%).

High-volume chatClaude 3.5 Sonnet

Lower output list price ($15/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIClaude 3.5 Sonnet

Lower TTFT (280 ms).

Long-document RAGClaude 3.5 Sonnet

Larger window (200k).

Screenshots / visionOpenAI: o1

Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (OpenAI: o1).

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Claude 3.5 Sonnet	Higher SWE-bench (49%).
High-volume chat	Claude 3.5 Sonnet	Lower output list price ($15/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Claude 3.5 Sonnet	Lower TTFT (280 ms).
Long-document RAG	Claude 3.5 Sonnet	Larger window (200k).
Screenshots / vision	OpenAI: o1	Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (OpenAI: o1).

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or OpenAI: o1?

OpenAI: o1 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,512). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.

Which is better at coding, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or OpenAI: o1?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads SWE-bench at 49% vs 48.9%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet output tokens are $15/1M versus $60/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.

Which is faster, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or OpenAI: o1?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet has the lower time-to-first-token (280 ms vs 420 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.

Which has the larger context window?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet accepts 200k tokens versus 200k.

Can I self-host either model?

Neither model is marked open-weights here. You are comparing hosted APIs.

Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?

No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.

What does preference Elo mean on this page?

Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude 3.5 Sonnet and OpenAI: o1 Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.