Claude Sonnet 4.6 Anthropic 1000000
💰 Total Cost Calculation (from Plugin)
Output: $0.007500 (rounded ~ $0.01)
Output: $0.007500 (rounded ~ $0.01)
Unit: $0.000000
Fees: $0.000000
Detailed Cost Analysis (from Plugin)
For 10,000 input tokens and 500 output tokens:
- Input Cost: $0.030000
- Output Cost: $0.007500 (rounded ~ $0.01)
- Total Cost: $0.024000 (rounded ~ $0.02)
- Cost per 1K tokens: $0.002286
- Tokens per dollar: 437,500 tokens
- Context Window: 1000000 tokens
Speed & Performance Analysis
With a processing speed of 450 tokens per second and 200ms time to first token:
- Processing Time: 23.98 seconds
- Latency: 200 milliseconds to first token
- Base Throughput: 450 tokens/second
- Effective Throughput: 441 tokens/second (temperature-adjusted)
Best Use Cases
Want this applied to YOUR actual stack?
This calculator shows the math for Claude Sonnet 4.6. Your decision needs more — current infrastructure, compliance requirements, actual workload patterns, volume tiers — that change which model is right for you.
Get a $39 personalized AI Architecture Audit. PDF tailored to your stack, delivered in under 60 seconds. 7-day no-questions-asked refund.
Get my instant AI audit — $39 →✨ Market Recommendations AI Model Registry
← Back to Claude Sonnet 4.6| Rank | AI Model & Provider | Total Cost | vs Claude Sonnet 4.6 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🏆 |
DeepSeek V4 Flash
DeepSeek
|
$0.000525 Best Value | ↓ 97.8% cheaper |
| 🥈 |
Mistral Small 3
Mistral AI
|
$0.000700 | ↓ 97.1% cheaper |
| 🥉 |
Voxtral Small 24B
Mistral AI
|
$0.000700 | ↓ 97.1% cheaper |
| #4 |
Devstral Small 2
Mistral AI
|
$0.000700 | ↓ 97.1% cheaper |
| #5 |
Ministral 3 (14B)
Mistral AI
|
$0.001200 | ↓ 95% cheaper |
| #6 |
Grok Code Fast 1
xAI
|
$0.001850 | ↓ 92.3% cheaper |
| #7 |
Nemotron 3 Super
Mistral AI
|
$0.002060 | ↓ 91.4% cheaper |
| #8 |
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Google
|
$0.002125 | ↓ 91.1% cheaper |
| #9 |
Devstral 2
Mistral AI
|
$0.002650 | ↓ 89% cheaper |
| #10 |
DeepSeek V4 Pro
DeepSeek
|
$0.002828 | ↓ 88.2% cheaper |
| #11 |
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Google
|
$0.002900 | ↓ 87.9% cheaper |
| #12 |
Mistral Large 3
Mistral AI
|
$0.003500 | ↓ 85.4% cheaper |
| #13 |
Gemini 3.1 Flash
Google
|
$0.004250 | ↓ 82.3% cheaper |
| #14 |
Kimi K2.5
Moonshot AI
|
$0.005010 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 79.1% cheaper |
| #15 |
GPT-5.4 mini
OpenAI
|
$0.006375 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 73.4% cheaper |
| #16 |
o4-mini Deep Research
OpenAI
|
$0.007500 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 68.8% cheaper |
| #17 |
Kimi K2.6
Moonshot AI
|
$0.007558 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 68.5% cheaper |
| #18 |
Claude Haiku 4.5
Anthropic
|
$0.008000 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 66.7% cheaper |
| #19 |
Grok 4.3
xAI
|
$0.008125 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 66.1% cheaper |
| #20 |
o4-mini
OpenAI
|
$0.008250 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 65.6% cheaper |
| #21 |
Gemini 2.5 Pro
Google
|
$0.011875 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 50.5% cheaper |
| #22 |
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Google
|
$0.012750 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 46.9% cheaper |
| #23 |
Magistral Medium
Mistral AI
|
$0.013500 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 43.8% cheaper |
| #24 |
Grok 4.20 Beta
xAI
|
$0.014000 (rounded ~ $0.01) | ↓ 41.7% cheaper |
| #25 |
GPT-5.3 Codex Spark
OpenAI
|
$0.016625 (rounded ~ $0.02) | ↓ 30.7% cheaper |
| #26 |
GPT-5.3 Instant
OpenAI
|
$0.016625 (rounded ~ $0.02) | ↓ 30.7% cheaper |
| #27 |
Gemini 3.1 Pro
Google
|
$0.017000 (rounded ~ $0.02) | ↓ 29.2% cheaper |
| #28 |
GPT-5.4
OpenAI
|
$0.021250 (rounded ~ $0.02) | ↓ 11.5% cheaper |
| #29 |
GPT-5.4 Thinking
OpenAI
|
$0.021250 (rounded ~ $0.02) | ↓ 11.5% cheaper |
| #30 |
Claude Opus 4.7
Anthropic
|
$0.040000 | ↑ 66.7% more |
| #31 |
Claude Opus 4.8
Anthropic
|
$0.040000 | ↑ 66.7% more |
| #32 |
Claude Opus 4.6
Anthropic
|
$0.040000 | ↑ 66.7% more |
| #33 |
GPT-5.5
OpenAI
|
$0.042500 (rounded ~ $0.04) | ↑ 77.1% more |
| #34 |
GPT-5.5 Instant
OpenAI
|
$0.042500 (rounded ~ $0.04) | ↑ 77.1% more |
| #35 |
o3 Deep Research
OpenAI
|
$0.075000 (rounded ~ $0.08) | ↑ 212.5% more |
| #36 |
o3 Pro
OpenAI
|
$0.150000 | ↑ 525% more |
| #37 |
GPT-5.2 Pro
OpenAI
|
$0.199500 | ↑ 731.3% more |
| #38 |
GPT-5.2 Pro
OpenAI
|
$0.199500 | ↑ 731.3% more |
DeepSeek V4 Flash DeepSeek
Mistral Small 3 Mistral AI
Voxtral Small 24B Mistral AI
Devstral Small 2 Mistral AI
Ministral 3 (14B) Mistral AI
Grok Code Fast 1 xAI
Nemotron 3 Super Mistral AI
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Google
Devstral 2 Mistral AI
DeepSeek V4 Pro DeepSeek
Gemini 2.5 Flash Google
Mistral Large 3 Mistral AI
Gemini 3.1 Flash Google
Kimi K2.5 Moonshot AI
GPT-5.4 mini OpenAI
o4-mini Deep Research OpenAI
Kimi K2.6 Moonshot AI
Claude Haiku 4.5 Anthropic
Grok 4.3 xAI
o4-mini OpenAI
Gemini 2.5 Pro Google
Gemini 3.5 Flash Google
Magistral Medium Mistral AI
Grok 4.20 Beta xAI
GPT-5.3 Codex Spark OpenAI
GPT-5.3 Instant OpenAI
Gemini 3.1 Pro Google
GPT-5.4 OpenAI
GPT-5.4 Thinking OpenAI
Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6 Anthropic
GPT-5.5 OpenAI
GPT-5.5 Instant OpenAI
o3 Deep Research OpenAI
o3 Pro OpenAI
GPT-5.2 Pro OpenAI
GPT-5.2 Pro OpenAI
Optimizing IDE Performance
For SaaS product teams building inline code generation features, selecting the right model requires balancing reasoning depth against the latency demands of a real-time developer environment. Claude Sonnet 4.6 has emerged as a preferred standard for these workflows, particularly where the model needs to maintain context across multi-file refactors or complex feature additions without hallucinating framework dependencies.
When your developers trigger suggestions in the IDE, they need a model that can process the current file’s state, imported dependencies, and relevant context from the wider project structure efficiently. Sonnet 4.6 excels here by providing near-Opus-level logic while remaining responsive enough for active development cycles. Its ability to handle large context windows means your IDE can feed it significant portions of a codebase without aggressive truncation, ensuring the suggestions it returns are coherent, syntactically accurate, and contextually aware.
Compared to larger reasoning models that may introduce unwanted friction through longer generation times, Sonnet 4.6 offers a distinct advantage for teams scaling their developer tools. It reliably follows complex, multi-step instructions and manages state during iterative development sessions. For teams prioritizing high-quality, reliable code completion that keeps pace with an engineer’s keystrokes, this model provides the necessary balance of intelligence and throughput, making it a foundation for professional-grade coding assistants.