Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Max) vs Beam 1.0
Which is better for the money: Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Max) by Anthropic or Beam 1.0 by Reflection? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Beam 1.0
Beam 1.0 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Max): 0.7% more intelligence, 93.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 89.3% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Max) | Beam 1.0 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 30.1 | 30.3 | +0.7% Beam 1.0 is 0.7% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,924.80 | $318.73 | −93.5% Beam 1.0 is 93.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 75.21s | 8.02s | −89.3% Beam 1.0 is 89.3% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $3.00 / $15.0 | $0.40 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
- Beam 1.0 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Max)Beam 1.0Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-sonnet-4-6-adaptive/reflection-beam · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-sonnet-4-6-adaptive/reflection-beam?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill