Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs OpenAI o1: A Comprehensive Comparison

The market is more crowded than ever, with models offering a dizzying array of capabilities. If you’re building tools for coding, tackling complex reasoning problems, or optimizing workflows, two advanced models stand out: Claude 3.5 Sonnet and OpenAI o1.

In this guide, we will help you understand which model suits your needs best. We’ll break down their performance, pricing, coding abilities, and special features to give you a clear picture of what each model brings to the table. After all, the right choice can make a significant difference in both your productivity and budget.

Why Compare Claude 3.5 Sonnet and OpenAI o1?

Choosing the right model can mean the difference between saving hours on coding tasks or struggling with incomplete solutions. It can also impact your budget, especially for long-term or high-volume use.

Quick Compare

Core Differences Between Claude 3.5 Sonnet and o1

OpenAI o1 is built for complex reasoning and problem-solving. Its deep, thoughtful responses make it perfect for developers working on intricate issues or requiring detailed explanations. o1 excels in tasks that demand precision and depth, such as advanced mathematics or scientific analysis.

In contrast, Claude 3.5 Sonnet focuses on speed and efficiency. It delivers quick responses, making it ideal for high-volume tasks, such as rapidly generating code or handling routine queries. With its cost-effective pricing, it’s a strong choice for users who prioritize productivity over deep reasoning.

Let’s dive deeper into the performance, cost and speed.

1. Performance: Coding, Debugging, and Advanced Reasoning

In general, Claude’s strength lies in rapid generation and its simplicity. OpenAI’s o1 is better for deep reasoning and debugging.

2. Cost Efficiency

Claude 3.5 Sonnet is 4x cheaper than OpenAI o1. It’s ideal for budget-conscious users who need reliable performance for everyday coding tasks, whereas o1 is best for users tackling high-value projects where advanced reasoning and context retention justify the cost.

3. Context Window and Speed

Claude 3.5 Sonnet can handle about 150% more tokens compared to OpenAI o1, giving it an edge for tasks requiring extensive context retention. The size of a context window is essential in determining how well AI models manage large inputs or extended conversations.

What’s new in the upgraded Claude 3.5 Sonnet - October 2024

On October 22, 2024, Anthropic released a new version of Claude 3.5 Sonnet, improving its SWE-bench Verified benchmark score from 33.4% to 49.0%, surpassing all publicly available models including OpenAI's o1-preview at 41.0%.

The upgraded model shows wide-ranging improvements across various industry benchmarks, particularly in coding and tool use tasks. Anthropic also introduced Computer Use capability that allows Claude 3.5 Sonnet to perform tasks by interacting with user interfaces (UI), such as generating keystrokes and mouse clicks.

Model Benchmarks

Benchmarks help measure speed, accuracy, and efficiency between models. Let's look at real-world benchmarks to understand how o1 and Claude 3.5 Sonnet performs in practical applications.

💡 Keep in mind that o1 uses more compute to achieve its advanced reasoning capabilities, which helps it outperform Claude 3.5 Sonnet in many benchmarks.

Comparing Claude 3.5 Sonnet and o1 on Coding Tasks

We will now look at some examples of how Claude 3.5 Sonnet and o1 perform on generating simple functions, debugging, and writing unit tests.

Example 1: Generating a Simple Function

Prompt: Write a Python function that takes a list of integers and returns the sum of all even numbers in the list. The function should handle empty lists and lists containing only one element.

--> Try it with Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Which model performed better?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet provided a simpler and more elegant solution, while OpenAI o1's approach was more thorough with edge case handling.

Example 2: Debugging Code

Prompt: Debug this JavaScript function to remove all vowels from a string.

function removeVowels(str) {
  return str.replace(/[aeiou]/gi, ");
}

→ Try the prompt with GPT-4o (as o1 isn't supported yet)

Which model performed better?

Both models showed strengths in debugging. OpenAI o1 is direct, while Claude 3.5 Sonnet provided a more user-friendly solution. This aligns with reports that o1 excels in complex problem-solving while Claude is preferred for simpler tasks.

Example 3: Writing Unit Tests

Prompt: Develop a set of unit tests for a function that takes a list of strings as input and returns a new list containing only the strings that are palindromes. The function should handle empty lists and lists containing only one element.

→ Try the prompt with Claude

Which model performed better?

This test indicates that Claude 3.5 Sonnet is more efficient in generating thorough unit tests, while o1's tests are functional but could be improved.

Choosing the Right AI Model

To select your ideal model, consider how their unique features help you meet your requirements.

• For applications that require desktop automation, pick Claude for its computer use feature that allows you to interact with computers.
• For deep reasoning and more complex problem-solving, OpenAI o1 makes a better choice.
• For budget-conscious users who don't need the 5-10% improvement that comes with o1, Claude 3.5 Sonnet is a better choice as it is 4x cheaper.
• For users who need to interpret charts and graphs, Claude 3.5 Sonnet is better as it scores 90.8% on the Chart Q&A benchmark compared to GPT-4o's 85.7% (o1's data is currently not public).
• For real-time applications, Claude 3.5 Sonnet is faster, with an average latency of 18.3s per request compared to o1's 39.4s.
• For users looking for the better coding experience, both models are good choices. But if you're looking for a more cost-effective choice for everyday coding tasks, particularly when integrated with tools like GitHub Copilot, Claude 3.5 Sonnet can be better.

Is OpenAI o1's Pro mode worth it?

While o1 Pro mode showed impressive results, some users found the performance gap between o1 Pro and Claude 3.5 Sonnet narrower than one might expect, since Claude 3.5 Sonnet can already achieve 90-95% accuracy in most applications, with significantly faster response times.

How do you access o1 Pro mode?

OpenAI's o1 Pro is the most advanced version of the o1 model available through the OpenAI API. Developers must subscribe to the ChatGPT Pro plan, which costs $200 per month.

Bottom Line

For most users, especially those working on practical coding tasks or needing fast, reliable solutions, Claude Sonnet 3.5 offers better value for money. However, if your work requires specialized capabilities like advanced vision or deep scientific analysis, and budget isn’t a concern, o1 Pro would be the better option.

Ultimately, the decision hinges on whether you prioritize cutting-edge features and accuracy or a more cost-effective, practical AI solution.

Other related comparisons

• O1 (and ChatGPT Pro) — here's everything you need to know

• Is Llama 3.3 better than Claude-Sonnet-3.5 or GPT-4?

• Google's Gemini-Exp-1206 is Outperforming O1 and GPT-4o

Questions or feedback?

Are the information out of date? Please raise an issue and we'd love to hear your insights!