Claude Sonnet 4.6 · Media / benchmark · Independent measurement
Artificial Analysis places Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) among comparable non-reasoning models at Intelligence Index 37, approximately 46 tok/s, input $3 / output $15 per million tokens, with a stated 1M context; the page also notes this model is deprecated, and the intelligence score no longer represents the latest Sonnet.
Unverified: the original source could not be rechecked. Historical figures below are not current verified results.
Artificial Analysis places Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) among comparable non-reasoning models at Intelligence Index 37, approximately 46 tok/s, input $3 / output $15 per million tokens, with a stated 1M context; the page also notes this model is deprecated, and the intelligence score no longer represents the latest Sonnet.
Display configuration: Claude Sonnet 4.6, Non-reasoning, Effort high.
Index version: Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.1.1, including GDPval-AA v2, τ³-Banking, Terminal-Bench v2.1, SciCode, Humanity's Last Exam, GPQA Diamond, CritPt, AA-Omniscience, AA-LCR.
Comparison pool: The page states non-reasoning models are compared only against other non-reasoning models; pricing tiers are compared against proprietary models in the same category with >$1/1M blended.
Maintenance status: This model is deprecated. Only continues default 10k input token load performance benchmarks; results for other loads are historical values. Suggests considering Claude Sonnet 5 (Non-reasoning).
The page shows the non-reasoning + high effort variant, not the reasoning variant. Input modalities text+image, output text, context 1M. Specific per-benchmark prompts and harness are in AA's Intelligence Index methodology, not fully expanded on this model page.
Model summary at collection time:
| Metric | Page value |
|---|---|
| Intelligence Index | 37 (category #5 / 63; category median 23) |
| Speed | 46.1 output tok/s (category #36 / 63; page says notably slow) |
| Input price | $3.00 / million tokens |
| Output price | $15.00 / million tokens |
| Cache discount | 90% |
| Cost per Intelligence Index task | N/A |
| Verbosity | N/A |
| Context | 1M tokens |
Same-page Intelligence comparison bar (excerpt, higher is better): Claude Opus 5 (max) 63, Claude Fable 5 62, GPT-5.6 Sol (max) 61, …, Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Non-reasoning) 37. In the speed comparison, Sonnet 4.6 is 46 tok/s, slower than most listed comparison models.
Page copy: Among the leading non-reasoning models on intelligence, but relatively expensive for same-price-tier non-reasoning models; supports text/image input.
By AA's methodology, Sonnet 4.6 non-reasoning high effort remains clearly stronger than the category median, but is no longer at the intelligence frontier as of 2026-08, and speed is also on the slow side. Suitable as a production reference point for "known unit price, 1M window, non-reasoning," but not suitable as a proxy for the latest Sonnet anymore. When reasoning variant scores are needed, open AA's reasoning page; do not substitute this page's 37-point score.
Page explicitly deprecated; some workloads no longer updated.
This page is Non-reasoning High Effort, not interchangeable with official default effort or results with thinking enabled.
Cost per task and verbosity are N/A; cannot infer per-task dollars from this page.
Intelligence Index is a composite of 9 items; cannot be decomposed into SWE or OSWorld.
Fix AA's v4.1.1 methodology, explicitly choosing whether to run non-reasoning or reasoning.
Set claude-sonnet-4-6 with effort=high, disable reasoning.
Record Index subscores, tok/s, latency, and actual $3/$15 billing separately.
When comparing against Sonnet 5 non-reasoning, use AA's currently maintained pages, not this deprecated page's historical loads.
The figures, task set, reasoning tier, and client conditions apply only to the listed source and collection snapshot. Different versions, harnesses, or providers must not be compared directly; undisclosed parameters remain unknown.
For a reproduction, fix the model version, provider or client, reasoning tier, tools, task-set version, sample count, and collection date, and record failures, retries, and human corrections. Full steps are in the source notes below.
Artificial Analysis · Artificial Analysis · Original publication date Unknown · Site edit date 2026-09-20
Open original sourceClaude Sonnet 4.6
Download the Tabbit client to check model access