Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Non-reasoning, Low) vs Beam 1.0

Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Non-reasoning, Low) vs Beam 1.0. A reliable intelligence-versus-cost verdict requires both models' intelligence scores and benchmark-run costs. Missing data is not a performance verdict.

AnthropicClaude Sonnet 4.6 (Non-reasoning, Low)Not ranked · benchmark data missing
Intelligence
23.30
Total cost
-
ReflectionBeam 1.0Off the frontier
Intelligence
30.30
Total cost
$319
Verdict

Comparison incomplete

A reliable intelligence-versus-cost verdict requires both models' intelligence scores and benchmark-run costs. Missing data is not a performance verdict.

MetricClaude Sonnet 4.6 (Non-reasoning, Low)Beam 1.0Difference
Intelligence (higher is better)23.330.3+30.0% Beam 1.0 is 30.0% more intelligent
Total AA cost (lower is better)Not reported$318.73— not comparable
End-to-end time (lower is better)12.47s7.56s−39.4% Beam 1.0 is 39.4% faster
Price per 1M tokens (in / out)$3.00 / $15.0$0.40 / $1.20
Input modalitiesText, ImageText
Open this matchup in the interactive pickerClaude Sonnet 4.6 (Non-reasoning, Low): what beats itBeam 1.0: what beats it
Matchup

Compare something else

Agents: Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-sonnet-4-6-non-reasoning-low-effort/reflection-beam · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-sonnet-4-6-non-reasoning-low-effort/reflection-beam?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill