Which Claude Sonnet Model is Better: 3.5 v1 or 3.5 v2? (Features & Cost Comparison)
I spent 8 hours testing o1 Pro ($200) vs Claude Sonnet 3.5 ($20) - Here's what nobody tells you about the real-world performance difference
Claude sonnet 3.5 pricing model
I used only Claude Sonnet 3.5 API for this month of freelance work - it cost $4 and saved me hundreds
Videos
There are so many options and I dont know which to choose. There is Cursor, Poe, Perplexity Pro, Anthropic API, Claude Webchat etc etc.
The Webchat is great but the usage limits are too annoying. I would like to more often use a bigger context size because then Sonnet seems to compare much better.
Right now I am thinking about using Poe with the Sonnet 3.5 200k Bot. 1k credits for one message and you'll get 1million credits per month for 20$. so I guess that would be quite cheap compared to the API.
Cursor also looks interesting though with their unlimited slow usage, but not sure if you also can get Sonnet 3.5 slow usage or not.
What do you guys use for programming?
After seeing all the hype about o1 Pro's release, I decided to do an extensive comparison. The results were surprising, and I wanted to share my findings with the community.
Testing Methodology I ran both models through identical scenarios, focusing on real-world applications rather than just benchmarks. Each test was repeated multiple times to ensure consistency.
Key Findings
-
Complex Reasoning * Winner: o1 Pro (but the margin is smaller than you'd expect) * Takes 20-30 seconds longer for responses * Claude Sonnet 3.5 achieves 90% accuracy in significantly less time
-
Code Generation * Winner: Claude Sonnet 3.5 * Cleaner, more maintainable code * Better documentation * o1 Pro tends to overengineer solutions
-
Advanced Mathematics * Winner: o1 Pro * Excels at PhD-level problems * Claude Sonnet 3.5 handles 95% of practical math tasks perfectly
-
Vision Analysis * Winner: o1 Pro * Detailed image interpretation * Claude Sonnet 3.5 doesn't have advanced vision capabilities yet
-
Scientific Reasoning * Tie * o1 Pro: deeper analysis * Claude Sonnet 3.5: clearer explanations
Value Proposition Breakdown
o1 Pro ($200/month): * Superior at PhD-level tasks * Vision capabilities * Deeper reasoning * That extra 5-10% accuracy in complex tasks
Claude Sonnet 3.5 ($20/month): * Faster responses * More consistent performance * Superior coding assistance * Handles 90-95% of tasks just as well
Interesting Observations * The response time difference is noticeable - o1 Pro often takes 20-30 seconds to "think" * Claude Sonnet 3.5's coding abilities are surprisingly superior * The price-to-performance ratio heavily favors Claude Sonnet 3.5 for most use cases
Should You Pay 10x More?
For most users, probably not. Here's why:
-
The performance gap isn't nearly as wide as the price difference
-
Claude Sonnet 3.5 handles most practical tasks exceptionally well
-
The extra capabilities of o1 Pro are mainly beneficial for specialized academic or research work
Who Should Use Each Model?
Choose o1 Pro if: * You need vision capabilities * You work with PhD-level mathematical/scientific content * That extra 5-10% accuracy is crucial for your work * Budget isn't a primary concern
Choose Claude Sonnet 3.5 if: * You need reliable, fast responses * You do a lot of coding * You want the best value for money * You need clear, practical solutions
Unless you specifically need vision capabilities or that extra 5-10% accuracy for specialized tasks, Claude Sonnet 3.5 at $20/month provides better value for most users than o1 Pro at $200/month.