Claude Sonnet 5 (Low) vs Beam 1.0
Which is better for the money: Claude Sonnet 5 (Low) by Anthropic or Beam 1.0 by Reflection? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Beam 1.0
Beam 1.0 vs Claude Sonnet 5 (Low): 24.7% more intelligence, 51.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 6.0% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5 (Low) | Beam 1.0 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 24.3 | 30.3 | +24.7% Beam 1.0 is 24.7% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $652.70 | $318.73 | −51.2% Beam 1.0 is 51.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 8.29s | 7.79s | −6.0% Beam 1.0 is 6.0% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $10.0 | $0.40 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Sonnet 5 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
- Beam 1.0 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Claude Sonnet 5 (Low)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-5-low/reflection-beam · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-sonnet-5-low/reflection-beam?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill