GPT-4o vs Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Head-to-head specifications
| Metric | GPT-4o | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU (general capability) | 88.7% | 88.7% | +0.0% |
| Context window | 128K tokens | 200K tokens | — |
| Price (input / output per 1M) | $2.5 / $10 | $3 / $15 | — |
| Access | Proprietary API | Proprietary API | — |
- GPT-4o leads general capability (MMLU 88.7% vs 88.7%).
- Claude 3.5 Sonnet offers the larger context window, useful for long documents and codebases.
Verdict: GPT-4o or Claude 3.5 Sonnet?
GPT-4o advantages
- Input cost (+17%)
- Output cost (+33%)
Claude 3.5 Sonnet advantages
- Context window (+36%)
Which should you choose?
- Choose the GPT-4o if you process large volumes of input and want the lowest cost.
- Choose the Claude 3.5 Sonnet if you work with long documents or large codebases.
- Choose the GPT-4o if you generate a lot of output and want the lowest cost.
Value for money
GPT-4o offers more capability per dollar — a better value pick for high-volume use, delivering 1.44× the MMLU-per-cost of the alternative.
GPT-4o vs Claude 3.5 Sonnet: which should you choose?
GPT-4o — OpenAI large language model (2024) with a 128K-token context window and an MMLU score of 88.7%.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet — Anthropic large language model (2024) with a 200K-token context window and an MMLU score of 88.7%.
GPT-4o vs Claude 3.5 Sonnet: GPT-4o scores higher on the MMLU benchmark. GPT-4o leads general capability (MMLU 88.7% vs 88.7%). Claude 3.5 Sonnet offers the larger context window, useful for long documents and codebases.
Capability and reasoning
On MMLU — a 57-subject benchmark of general knowledge and reasoning — the GPT-4o scores 88.7% versus 88.7%. MMLU is a useful proxy for raw knowledge but does not capture instruction-following, coding, tool use, latency or safety, so treat it as one signal among several.
Context window
The Claude 3.5 Sonnet handles up to 200K tokens per request, which sets how much documentation, transcript or code it can reason over at once — decisive for retrieval-augmented and long-document workflows.
Pricing and access
GPT-4o is proprietary api and Claude 3.5 Sonnet is proprietary api. Proprietary models bill per token via API; open-weight models can be self-hosted, trading per-call cost for infrastructure you manage. For production, weigh throughput, rate limits and data-residency needs alongside headline price.
The verdict
Both are credible choices in the ai model comparison space; the specification table above lays out every metric so you can weigh the trade-offs that matter to you. Pick the one whose strengths line up with how you will actually use it.
Frequently asked questions
Is the GPT-4o better than the Claude 3.5 Sonnet?
GPT-4o takes the overall edge, though Claude 3.5 Sonnet wins in specific areas worth weighing. GPT-4o leads general capability (MMLU 88.7% vs 88.7%).
What is the main difference between the GPT-4o and the Claude 3.5 Sonnet?
GPT-4o leads general capability (MMLU 88.7% vs 88.7%). Claude 3.5 Sonnet offers the larger context window, useful for long documents and codebases.
Which is better value?
GPT-4o offers more capability per dollar — a better value pick for high-volume use, delivering 1.44× the MMLU-per-cost of the alternative.
Which should I choose?
Choose the GPT-4o if you process large volumes of input and want the lowest cost. Choose the Claude 3.5 Sonnet if you work with long documents or large codebases.
Methodology
Large language models are compared on the MMLU benchmark (a widely-cited 57-subject test of general knowledge and reasoning, reported as a percentage), maximum context window, and published API pricing per million input and output tokens. Open-weight models can also be self-hosted. Benchmarks capture only part of real-world quality, which also depends on tool use, latency, safety and task fit.