Roboflow

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Sonnet 5

Compare Claude Opus 4.8 and Claude Sonnet 5 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Classification, OCR, Object Detection, and Open Prompt.

Compare Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Sonnet 5 live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
AnthropicClaude Opus 4.8
Run to compare this model.
AnthropicClaude Sonnet 5
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Sonnet 5 on Vision Evals

Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on 3 of the six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.8 leads 53.0% to 43.0%.

Overall, Claude Opus 4.8 averages 66.8% (#19 of 30) against 66.4% (#21 of 30) for Claude Sonnet 5.

Claude Sonnet 5 is both cheaper ($0.0064 vs $0.016 per sample) and faster (4.8s vs 5.2s per sample).

Claude Opus 4.8Claude Sonnet 5

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Sonnet 5 Comparison Table

Evals updated August 14, 2026Pricing updated August 19, 2026

PropertyClaude Opus 4.8Claude Sonnet 5
OrganizationAnthropicAnthropic
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateMay 2026Jun 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
Parameters
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$5.00$2.00
Output $/1M$25.00$10.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
66.8%
66.4%
Avg cost / sample$0.016$0.0064
Avg speed / sample5.20s4.84s
By task
Object Detection
38.6%
$0.026
36.1%
$0.011
Counting
52.7%
$0.0076
56.8%
$0.0030
Identification
75.0%
$0.0067
81.3%
$0.0027
OCR
93.8%
$0.020
91.7%
$0.0078
Data Extraction
87.6%
$0.0076
89.7%
$0.0030
Reasoning (low)
53.0%
$0.0078
43.0%
$0.0032
Reasoning (high)
52.3%
$0.0078
43.0%
$0.0043

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Sonnet 5: Overview

Claude Opus 4.8

Claude Opus 4.8 is Anthropic's most capable generally available large language model, released on May 28, 2026 as an incremental upgrade to Claude Opus 4.7. The model accepts text and image inputs and produces text outputs, with a 1 million token context window on the Claude API, Amazon Bedrock, and Google Cloud Vertex AI (200k tokens on Microsoft Foundry) and up to 128k max output tokens. It uses adaptive thinking and supports adjustable effort tiers — high by default, with extra and max tiers available for more demanding tasks. A fast mode operates at approximately 2.5x standard speed. The model is described by Anthropic as a hybrid reasoning model designed for advanced coding, agentic workflows, long-context reasoning, and professional knowledge work.

Key behavioral improvements over Opus 4.7 include substantially reduced rates of unreported code flaws, improved honesty in self-assessment, and better tool-calling reliability. On Anthropic's Super-Agent benchmark, Opus 4.8 completes every case end-to-end, and it scores 84% on Online-Mind2Web for computer-use and browser-agent tasks. It achieves 88.6% on SWE-bench Verified and 69.2% on SWE-bench Pro. Alongside the model, Anthropic launched Dynamic Workflows in Claude Code (research preview), which enables Claude to orchestrate hundreds of parallel subagents for codebase-scale tasks such as large migrations. The Messages API was also updated to accept mid-task system messages without breaking prompt caching, improving support for long-running agentic pipelines.

Claude Sonnet 5

Claude Sonnet 5 is a mid-tier large language model from Anthropic, released on June 30, 2026, as the latest model in the Sonnet series and a direct successor to Claude Sonnet 4.6. It is a hybrid reasoning model designed primarily for agentic workflows, software coding, and professional tasks. The model features a 1 million token context window, a 128k maximum output token limit, and runs adaptive thinking by default, giving API users fine-grained control over reasoning effort across five levels (low, medium, high, max, and extra-high). It uses an updated tokenizer shared with Opus 4.7 and later models, which produces approximately 30% more tokens for equivalent text compared to earlier Claude models. On benchmarks, Sonnet 5 scores 63.2% on agentic coding and 81.2% on OSWorld, narrowing the gap with Opus 4.8 while remaining at Sonnet-tier pricing.

The model supports text and image input with text output, and accepts tools including browsers and terminals for autonomous multi-step task execution. Anthropic's safety evaluations report that Sonnet 5 shows a lower rate of undesirable behaviors than Sonnet 4.6 and is generally safer in agentic contexts, with improved resistance to prompt injection and reduced sycophancy. Cybersecurity safeguards equivalent to those on Opus 4.7 and 4.8 are active, though Anthropic notes the model was not deliberately trained on cybersecurity tasks. The model is proprietary and API-only, with no open weights.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Claude Opus 4.8 performed slightly better overall. The two split the six vision tasks 3 to 3, but Claude Opus 4.8 averages 66.8% (#19 of 30) against 66.4% (#21 of 30) for Claude Sonnet 5. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Reasoning benchmark at low effort, Claude Opus 4.8 leads with 53.0% against 43.0%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Claude Sonnet 5 is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0064 per sample against $0.016. Claude Opus 4.8 is priced at $5.00 per 1M input tokens and $25.00 per 1M output; Claude Sonnet 5 is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $10.00 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Claude Sonnet 5 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 4.8s per inference against 5.2s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.

Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for image captioning and image classification in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.