Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs OpenAI: GPT-5.2-Codex
Head-to-head API cost, context, and performance comparison. Synced at 9:54:00 AM.
Executive Summary
When evaluating Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.6 against OpenAI: GPT-5.2-Codex, the pricing structure is a key differentiator. OpenAI: GPT-5.2-Codex is approximately 13% more cost-effective per 1 million tokens overall.
However, when looking at raw reasoning capabilities, Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads with a statistical ELO score of 1350. For tasks involving complex logic, coding, or instruction-following, developers might prefer Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.6, provided their budget allows for the API burn rate.
You are losing 13%
per million tokens by hardcoding Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.6.
Stop guessing exactly which model to route to. Deploy the 0ms Intelligence Engine to automatically arbitrage this 13% gap in your production environment instantly.
Raw Technical comparison
Verdict
If you are looking for pure performance and capability, Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.6 is statistically superior. However, if API burn rate is the primary concern, OpenAI: GPT-5.2-Codex wins out aggressively in pricing.
People Also Ask
Is Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.6 cheaper than OpenAI: GPT-5.2-Codex?
No. OpenAI: GPT-5.2-Codex is the more cost-effective model, operating at a lower price point per 1 million tokens.
Which model has the larger context window?
The Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.6 model has the advantage in memory, offering a massive 1,000,000 token limit for document ingestion.