Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GPT-5 Mini

Compare Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GPT-5 Mini side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Object Detection, Classification, Image Captioning, OCR, and Open Prompt.

Compare Claude Sonnet 4.5 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.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
AnthropicClaude Sonnet 4.5
Run to compare this model.
OpenAIGPT-5 Mini
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GPT-5 Mini: Overview

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Claude Sonnet 4.5, released by Anthropic in September 2025, is the company’s most advanced Sonnet-series model, built for high-performance reasoning, coding, and long-horizon agentic workflows. It is a multimodal system that accepts both text and images, with a 200,000-token context window designed for handling large documents and extended interactions. Anthropic highlights its improvements in reliability, reduced sycophancy, and alignment, making it suitable for sustained enterprise use.

The model delivers strong results in coding and autonomous workflows, achieving 61.4% on the OSWorld benchmark and leading performance on SWE-bench Verified. It introduces infrastructure features such as a memory tool (beta), checkpointing for Claude Code, parallel tool use, and tighter integration with VS Code. Compared to Opus, which targets broader reasoning, Sonnet 4.5 is optimized for structured, long-duration tasks. Positioned against leading offerings from OpenAI and Google, it is aimed at enterprise automation, software engineering, and research-intensive applications.

GPT-5 Mini

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 4.5 vs GPT-5 Mini Comparison Table

PropertyClaude Sonnet 4.5GPT-5 Mini
OrganizationAnthropicOpenAI
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateSep 2025Aug 2025
Context Window200K400K
Parameters
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$3.00$0.250
Output $/1M$15.00$2.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
ClassificationDemoDemo
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts
Score key:≥75%40–74%<40%
Visual Understanding
Overall Score
59.7%
73.13%
Avg Response Time5.67s11.72s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens2.2K1.4K
Median output tokens182143
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0092$0.0006
Defect Detection
73.3%(11/15)
80%(12/15)
Document Understanding
77.8%(7/9)
77.8%(7/9)
Object Counting
10%(1/10)
10%(1/10)
Object Understanding
64.3%(9/14)
85.7%(12/14)
Spatial Understanding
63.2%(12/19)
89.5%(17/19)
OCR
Overall Score
67.44%
76.86%
Avg Response Time3.58s4.63s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens701105
Median output tokens114209
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0038$0.0004
Focused Scene OCR
71.7%(71/99)
72.7%(72/99)
Handwritten Math
50%(5/10)
License Plate Recognition
53.3%(16/30)
93.3%(28/30)
Text Recognition
80%(24/30)
VQA & Extraction
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