Side-by-side technical and economic comparison between Anthropic's Claude Sonnet 5 and Meta / Together's Llama 4 Vivas.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5 | Llama 4 Vivas | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Provider Organization | Anthropic | Meta / Together | — |
| Standard Input / 1M | $2.00 | $0.25 | Llama 4 Vivas (88% lower) |
| Cached Input / 1M | $0.20 | $0.06 | Llama 4 Vivas lower |
| Output / 1M | $10.00 | $0.85 | Llama 4 Vivas lower |
| Context Window | 1M | 1M | Equal |
| Max Generation Tokens | 16.4k | 128k | Llama 4 Vivas |
| Tokenizer Family | Anthropic Claude BPE (~65k vocabulary) | Meta Llama 3 Tokenizer (128k vocabulary) | — |
| Workload (per month) | Claude Sonnet 5 | Llama 4 Vivas |
|---|---|---|
| Chatbot10k requests · 500 in / 200 out | $30.00 | $2.95 |
| RAG app100k requests · 8,000 in / 1,200 out | $2,800.00 | $302.00 |
| Coding agent100k requests · 12,000 in / 2,000 out | $4,400.00 | $470.00 |
Standard rates, no caching or batch discounts. Model your own numbers below.
Opt for Claude Sonnet 5 when your engineering requirements prioritize Anthropic's ecosystem, specific tokenizer efficiencies (Calibrated Claude Tokenizer (±3%)), or when your expected prompt-to-completion ratios favor its $2/M input rate.
Opt for Llama 4 Vivas when looking for Meta / Together's tooling integration, specific context window depth (1M tokens), or when output generation volume favors its $0.85/M rate.
At a typical 3:1 input-to-output token mix, Llama 4 Vivas is about 90% cheaper than Claude Sonnet 5. Claude Sonnet 5 costs $2 per 1M input and $10 per 1M output tokens; Llama 4 Vivas costs $0.25 and $0.85.
Both models have a 1M-token context window.
Claude Sonnet 5: yes, cached input costs $0.2/1M. Llama 4 Vivas: yes, cached input costs $0.06/1M.