LLM API PRICING & BENCHMARK HUB
Last updated:
Planning to build an AI agent or application with Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6 in 2026? Understanding your inference architecture budget is critical. At $5.00 per 1M input tokens and $25.00 per 1M output tokens, this model offers reasoning depth suitable for Hard research, difficult coding, and quality-critical generation. Our interactive tool below allows you to model your exact inference architecture, adjusting for prompt caching and batching to find the highest budget-optimized scaling for your production requirements.
Provider (9/12 · hover to remove)
Model (3 available)
Typical API, Heavy RAG, and Max context stress set monthly requests and how hard each call uses the token sliders—stress caps per request and trims calls so totals stay readable. Clears a use-case template on the right. Moving requests clears this row; moving input/output clears the tier.
Sets input, output, requests, and template value weights for the ROI read—touch a token slider and weights fall back to 50% / 50%. With Deep Reasoning, output is ×1.4 before pricing. Clears a volume preset on the left.
Off — no image fees for models that support vision.
Turn On to include image fees.
Applies cached input rates where this catalog lists them (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, …). Models without a cached rate keep list pricing.
Add markup for client pricing
Model hidden reasoning / extended thinking charged like output tokens when enabled.
Enable for 50% off input & output
Get notified when cost exceeds limit
Estimated monthly
≈ $5,400.00 over 12 months if spend stayed flat (no growth or price changes).
List (catalog)
$5.00 in
$25.00 out
per 1M tokens
This scenario
$5.00 in
$25.00 out
effective $/1M
Share of this month
Bars use your current request and token settings. The right chart contrasts published list pricing with your effective rates after cache, batch, and related toggles.
By category
Input, output, and vision for this workload.
List vs optimized (monthly)
Total monthly at list ratecard vs your scenario.
Month n = n × estimated monthly bill — no seasonality or usage growth.
SWE-bench Verified at 82.1% maps to 98 coding. GPQA Diamond at 91.3% maps to 96 logic. MATH at 94.2% maps to 95 math. As a flagship reasoning model, speed is set to 50.
Composite
Catalog benchmark · 0–100 per row
General knowledge & logic (MMLU-style)
Broad reasoning proxy for comparing model families — not a literal MMLU leaderboard value.
Coding & agents (HumanEval-style)
Coding and tool-use suitability from provider tier and model-id hints, not a fresh code benchmark.
Instruction following
How tightly the model tends to follow complex instructions in our catalog benchmark.
Math & reasoning depth
Numeric and reasoning tilt; boosted for reasoning-first ids in the catalog where applicable.
Same model as above, shown as a radar with a grey industry-average shadow. Axes are normalized in this view, not absolute benchmark percentiles.
Model DNA radar chart for selected models
Axes: Price · Logic · Coding · Context · Speed · Multimodal · Openness. Openness = rough “how open/hostable” hint from provider family, not a license statement.
Catalog Benchmarks (0–100). Manually maintained model-level scores; verify on your own evals.
Prompt vs catalog window
8,000 input tokens of 1,000,000 max. Confirm hard output caps in the vendor console.
0.8% of catalog window
TPS speed index
50 /100
≈ 108 TPS display estimate — not measured from your traffic.
US = 100 baseline. Values are a deterministic illustration from model id and provider tier, not ping or routing from your network.
United States
Baseline edge (illustrative)
Canada
Typical North America variance
Australia
Long-haul hint vs US edge
Architecture
Dense
MoE vs dense inferred from catalog / id.
Deployment
Managed API (cloud)
Tools and modalities
Tools / function calling (Strong)
Multimodal text + images (vision-capable in catalog)
JSON mode
Yes (typical API)
Audio (id hint)
No strong id hint
Nothing here is a live latency measurement, SLO, or inventory of your deployment. Use vendor dashboards and your own traces for TTFT, tokens per second under load, and regional routing.
Est. API spend
/ month at these sliders
Strongest scenario
Data Extract
Highest fit index right now
Evaluate if Claude Opus 4.6 meets your production requirements based on your token volume and active features above. What follows folds those same sliders into pricing and capability signals—value for spend, a concise ROI read, and four mapped scenarios—so you can stress-test this pick without re-entering inputs.
ROI Verdict: Claude Opus 4.6 — At your effective token prices this scenario sits in a premium band versus lighter-weight options. On the same catalog benchmark axes as the Model DNA chart, Claude Opus 4.6 shows strong coding performance. Stress-test against hard research, difficult coding, and quality-critical generation if that mirrors your product.
Value for spend
Higher usually means more catalog intelligence per dollar at your effective token prices — for comparisons inside this tool only.
Our one-line read
ROI Verdict: Claude Opus 4.6 — At your effective token prices this scenario sits in a premium band versus lighter-weight options. On the same catalog benchmark axes as the Model DNA chart, Claude Opus 4.6 shows strong coding performance. Stress-test against hard research, difficult coding, and quality-critical generation if that mirrors your product.
Figures mirror the calculator above. Treat as orientation: confirm with your own benchmarks, regions, and contract discounts before you commit budget.
Each card shows a fit score (0–100) for a typical workload shape. Scan the bars, then read the lane that sounds like your product.
32
fit
Claude Opus 4.6 in chatbot arena matchups
Expect slower and pricier turns than Sonnet-class models. For chatbot arenas, pricing on output tokens matters most when replies are long — Claude Opus 4.6 is usable across tiers if you cap completion length.
35
fit
Claude Opus 4.6 in coding & agent workflows
Claude Opus 4.6 handles coding workloads with a high coding index (98/100 on the same heuristic axis as the DNA radar) — Hard research, difficult coding, and quality-critical generation
25
fit
Claude Opus 4.6 on long documents & RAG
Context window 1,000,000 tokens frames how much Claude Opus 4.6 can hold per call — pair chunking with hard research, difficult coding, and quality-critical generation.
36
fit
Claude Opus 4.6 on structured extraction
Heuristic math/logic blend suggests Claude Opus 4.6 for numeric-heavy extraction — always validate on your schema.
Fit indices mix catalog intelligence with your effective prices; incompatible Vision or non-native Deep reasoning toggles zero or heavily discount lanes, matching the compare value engine. The efficiency ring blends the same template weights — orientation only, not a vendor benchmark.
Workload: Custom Configuration
64
Overall Intelligence Score
Scores below 70 indicate elevated delivery risk for this workload profile — proceed with a controlled pilot or evaluate alternatives with a stronger fit before commitment.
Monthly spend mix — use the split to prioritize where you optimize first.
Pros
Cons
Improve model–workload alignment
With your current settings, Claude Opus 4.6 may underdeliver on this workload. Shortlist models with better capability match—then confirm with list pricing, batch discounts, and side‑by‑side API cost analysis.
Choosing a better‑aligned LLM API reduces failed generations, rework, and runaway inference spend on high‑volume traffic.
Best for: High-volume simple chat, drafting, and cost experiments
Best for: Hard problems where correctness beats speed
Best for: Reasoning-heavy analytics, tutoring, and internal tools on a budget
Best for: Massive context RAG, long video/text analysis, and research dumps
Need a shareable artifact?
Get a print-ready PDF of your results and a CSV spreadsheet. Tap the button, then enter your work email. We use it to build your files and start the download—and to email you a copy if the site owner enabled that.
Per-model LLM cost calculator by LeadsCalc
Receive a comprehensive native vector PDF report with unit economics, benchmarks, and illustrative charts from your current settings.
By submitting, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms.
Embed this Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6 cost surface on your own domain — whitelabel branding, lead capture, and the same sliders your prospects already trust on LeadsCalc.
FREE TO START
NO CREDIT CARD REQUIRED
Optimization playbook
This part is here to help you use Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6 on Anthropic without surprises. We use the same simple numbers you see in the calculator above. We are not your lawyer or your security team — grown-ups on your side still need to check contracts and privacy rules.
A token is a small piece of text the computer counts. It is not always one word — short words can share a token, long words can use more than one. That is OK. What matters is: more tokens → more money, just like more minutes on a phone plan.
When you move the input and output sliders on this page, you are really saying "my question is this long" and "I want an answer about this long." The bill grows when either side grows.
For Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6, our list says about $5.00 for every 1 million input tokens and about $25.00 for every 1 million answer tokens.
Those prices are list prices from our catalog. Your real bill can go up or down when you turn on batch mode, caching, vision, or special "think longer" modes — use the toggles above to see that story for your own app.
Picture the AI living in a data center. If your users are in Australia but you always call a far-away region, answers can feel slower and routing can get fussier. Picking a closer home base is like picking a playground near your house instead of across town.
Teams in Australia often test Sydney (ap-southeast-2) or Singapore. Teams in the US often pick us-east-1 or us-west-2. Canada often maps to the same US zones or a Canada-only route if Anthropic offers one.
After you pick a region in the real Anthropic console, come back here and plug in the traffic you expect. Then the money line matches what your users will feel in production.
Claude Opus 4.6
Anthropic
The three boxes above are your quick cheat sheet for Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6: Input is what you pay to send stuff in, Output is what you pay to get answers back, and Context is how big one combined message can be (1,000,000 tokens in our catalog).
Performance snapshot (hints, not benchmarks)
Think of this as a report card for Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6 inside LeadsCalc — not a race you won in real life. The numbers come from our catalog, not from timing your app today.
Speed score 50/100 means we guess it feels more patient for most apps (moderate / variable). Smarts score 96/100 blends logic, coding, listening, and math hints into one line so you can compare models without a PhD.
One more plain note: Expect slower and pricier turns than Sonnet-class models. In kid words: the table is a guess from our catalog, like a weather forecast — your real app might feel a little different.
| Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6 | |
|---|---|
| Speed hinthow snappy it may feel | 50/100 |
| Speed bucketwe group models like this | Moderate / variable |
| Overall smartsone blended score from our catalog | 96/100 |
| Logic & tricky puzzleshard questions, not just small talk | 96/100 |
| Coding hintgood for code or not | 98/100 |
| Following instructionsdoes it listen well | 95/100 |
| Math-style thinkingnumbers and logic | 95/100 |
| Room for one big askVery large — whole codebases or book-scale text in one shot (watch cost). | ~1.0M tokens |
Catalog Benchmarks (0–100). Manually maintained model-level scores; verify on your own evals.
Our price list for this model does not show a special cached rate yet. That does not mean caching never exists — it just means you should read Anthropic's own page, then type the discount you really get into your own spreadsheet.
Catalog hint: Not listed in catalog — assume full input rate
The system prompt is the quiet voice that tells the model how to behave. Every word there is counted on every chat turn — like paying a cover charge at the door again and again.
Keep the rules short and sweet. Put long examples in a file your app reads once, or pull facts with search ( RAG ) instead of pasting huge walls of text. Then slide the input knob above and watch the month total shrink for Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6.
Feature hint: Often supported — enable in calculator when catalog lists a cached rate
Some apps need the model to call tools (like a calculator or a database) or return neat JSON for your code to parse. Think of tools like extra hands the model can borrow — super useful, but each call can add more steps and more tokens.
Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6 can hold a long story in one go — up to about 1,000,000 tokens in our catalog. That is like a very big book, but you still pay more when you stuff more text in each ask.
RAG is a fancy way to say "search my files first, then ask the model with only the best bits." That is cheaper than dumping a whole library into one prompt, and it often answers better too.
Our catalog caps one combined message around 1.0M tokens for this model — still huge, but not infinite. Split giant PDFs into chunks, only paste the top matches, and cap how long each chunk can be.
Files & docs hint: Large single-shot context — fewer chunks for long PDFs / repos (still extract text per API rules)
When you send a picture, the bill is usually different from plain text — like adding a snack on top of your meal. Turn on vision in the calculator above when your workload uses images so the total feels real.
Batch is like mailing letters in one big bag at the end of the day instead of hand-delivering each one. The answer might arrive later, but the stamp can cost a lot less — many vendors advertise roughly half off list for batch-style tiers when they apply.
If your job is not urgent overnight reports, exports, or backfills try the batch toggle in the calculator and compare the monthly line for Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6.
Some models can do extra thinking steps before they speak. That can help with hard puzzles, but it is like leaving the lights on longer — you often pay for more work behind the scenes.
In your product, default people to the normal mode and only offer the heavy-thinking switch when it really matters (math contests, tricky planning, rare audits). Ask your team to read Anthropic's billing page so you know which tokens count as output, thinking, or something else.
Speed story: Moderate / variable — Expect slower and pricier turns than Sonnet-class models.
Chat apps love long friendly replies. Long replies mean more output tokens, and output tokens are money walking out the door.
Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6 can work well for assistants if you set a max answer length, cache the boring repeated rules, and trim empty chit-chat.
Our one-line vibe check: Hard research, difficult coding, and quality-critical generation
Watch-out: Cost-sensitive high-QPS endpoints
Extraction means "read this messy pile, give me clean rows." You want short answers (like tight JSON) so you do not pay for a poem nobody asked for.
Put repeating examples in a cached block when you can, split monster spreadsheets into smaller jobs, and use batch pricing when the work can wait. Slide the output tokens down in the calculator to see how sensitive your bill is.
JSON hint: Yes — JSON / schema-style outputs widely used
Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6 can still help with code, but our hints say another family might be the specialist for raw coding speed. Use this model where its strengths shine, and switch when the task is mostly boilerplate generation.
Catalog coding score: 98/100 (same 0–100 toy scale as the table above — not a promise about your private repo).
Anthropic's strongest reasoning and quality tier in the catalog
This website is a calculator — we are not your security team. Anthropic decides what they log, how long they keep it, and which countries hold the data. If you handle health or school records, grown-ups need signed papers (things like BAAs / DPAs) — not just vibes.
Before any secret leaves your building, ask: "Would I be OK if this text was on a billboard?" If not, strip names, addresses, and passwords before you call Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6.
Vendor note: Training / retention / regions are vendor-specific — confirm in enterprise agreements.
Most people use Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6 as a hosted API from Anthropic — you get updates and elastic scale, but you follow their rules and regions.
Story from our catalog: Anthropic — US-hosted Claude APIs, safety-focused positioning — API / proprietary (hosted)
Model prices bounce around like airplane tickets when airlines compete. New "mini" or "flash" models often push older prices down — good for buyers, noisy for budgets.
Save a PDF from this page when finance asks for proof, and peek at Anthropic's release notes when you renew a contract. The sliders above stay the fastest way to ask "what if traffic doubles?"
Live hint: Adjust sliders above for your tokens, requests, vision, cache, and batch — totals update live.
If you run an agency, you can embed the same sliders your visitors used here — with your colors, your logo, and a form that sends leads to your email or CRM. You skip rebuilding giant price tables by hand.
Jump straight into a head-to-head pricing view with Claude Opus 4.6 first in the comparison slug, matching how the rest of LeadsCalc orders model battles.
See token pricing, context windows, and quick qualitative notes for Claude Opus 4.6 against GPT-4o in one layout.
Compare Claude Opus 4.6 vs GPT-4o API PricingSee token pricing, context windows, and quick qualitative notes for Claude Opus 4.6 against Claude 3.5 Sonnet in one layout.
Compare Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude 3.5 Sonnet API PricingSee token pricing, context windows, and quick qualitative notes for Claude Opus 4.6 against DeepSeek V3 in one layout.
Compare Claude Opus 4.6 vs DeepSeek V3 API PricingShort answers grounded in the catalog fields used by this calculator. Adjust assumptions in the tool above for your real traffic mix.
Based on our catalog benchmarks, Claude Opus 4.6 is evaluated across coding, logic, math, and instruction following. Use the performance radar chart above to see its exact strengths, or visit our comparison hub to see head-to-head win rates against models like GPT-4o and Claude 3.5 Sonnet.
For Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6, this calculator uses $5.00 per 1M input tokens and $25.00 per 1M output tokens as baseline API pricing. Rates can vary by region, commitment tier, and batch endpoints—use the calculator above to stress-test your workload.
Claude Opus 4.6 is listed with a 1,000,000-token context window for a single request in our catalog. Very long prompts still increase cost linearly with tokens, so pair window size with caching and retrieval when possible.
Claude Opus 4.6 supports image inputs in this catalog; vision is priced separately from text tokens (see your provider for how images map to tokens).
Use the comparison links in the section above for side-by-side pricing and context, or open the full comparison hub at https://www.leadscalc.com/calculators/ai/compare to explore more model pairs.
Claude Opus 4.6 is offered under Anthropic in this catalog. Wire your keys and endpoints per their docs; this page focuses on token economics, not account setup.