Claude Sonnet 5 vs GPT-5 Mini
Compare Claude Sonnet 5 and GPT-5 Mini side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Object Detection, Open Prompt, OCR, Classification, and Image Captioning.
Compare Claude Sonnet 5 vs GPT-5 Mini 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.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Claude Sonnet 5 vs GPT-5 Mini: Overview
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.
GPT-5 Mini, released by OpenAI on August 7, 2025, is a mid-tier variant of the GPT-5 family that balances cost, speed, and capability. It is multimodal, supporting both text and image inputs, and offers a substantial input context window of ~400,000 tokens with output lengths up to ~128,000 tokens. While less powerful than the full GPT-5, it inherits its safety tuning, instruction-following improvements, and multimodal reasoning, making it a practical choice for developers who need large context handling without the expense of premium models.
GPT-5 Mini is optimized for affordability while retaining strong reasoning performance. Benchmarks show it outperforming earlier models such as GPT-4o on many multimodal and medical VQA tasks, though it lags behind GPT-5 on the most complex problems. Ideal use cases include prototyping, scalable content generation, document analysis, and mid-range reasoning tasks where efficiency and context capacity matter more than top-tier accuracy.
Claude Sonnet 5 vs GPT-5 Mini Comparison Table
| Property | Claude Sonnet 5 | GPT-5 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Jun 2026 | Aug 2025 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 400K |
| Parameters | ||
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $2.00 | $0.250 |
| Output $/1M | $10.00 | $2.00 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| Model Features | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts Score key:≥75%40–74%<40% | ||
| Visual Understanding | ||
| Overall Score | 70.15% | 73.13% |
| Avg Response Time | 3.90s | 11.72s |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 2.1K | 1.4K |
| Median output tokens | 61 | 143 |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0048 | $0.0006 |
| Defect Detection | 73.3%(11/15) | 80%(12/15) |
| Document Understanding | 66.7%(6/9) | 77.8%(7/9) |
| Object Counting | 20%(2/10) | 10%(1/10) |
| Object Understanding | 92.9%(13/14) | 85.7%(12/14) |
| Spatial Understanding | 78.9%(15/19) | 89.5%(17/19) |
| OCR | ||
| Overall Score | 83.84% | 76.86% |
| Avg Response Time | 2.77s | 4.63s |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 642 | 105 |
| Median output tokens | 64 | 209 |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0019 | $0.0004 |
| Focused Scene OCR | 88.9%(88/99) | 72.7%(72/99) |
| Handwritten Math | 50%(5/10) | 50%(5/10) |
| License Plate Recognition | 90%(27/30) | 93.3%(28/30) |
| Text Recognition | 80%(24/30) | 80%(24/30) |
| VQA & Extraction | 80%(48/60) | 78.3%(47/60) |
Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology