L LLM Cloud Hub
Side-by-side comparison

Claude 3.7 Sonnet (thinking) vs Sonar Pro Search

Anthropic

Claude 3.7 Sonnet (thinking)

πŸ‘ Vision πŸ”§ Tools
Input / 1M
$3.0000
Output / 1M
$15.0000
View Claude 3.7 Sonnet (thinking) β†’
Perplexity

Sonar Pro Search

πŸ‘ Vision
Input / 1M
$3.0000
Output / 1M
$15.0000
View Sonar Pro Search β†’
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (thinking)Sonar Pro Search
Provider Anthropic Perplexity
Context window Maximum tokens (input + output) the model can process in a single request. Glossary β†’ 200,000 200,000
Capabilities Optional capabilities the model advertises: vision (images), tools (function calling), json_mode (structured output). vision, tools vision
Input $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens you send (prompt + context). Cheaper side highlighted. Glossary β†’ 3.0000 3.0000
Output $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens the model generates. Output is normally 3–5Γ— pricier than input. Glossary β†’ 15.0000 15.0000

Frequently asked questions

Which is cheaper, Claude 3.7 Sonnet (thinking) or Sonar Pro Search?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet (thinking) is cheaper than Sonar Pro Search on a 50/50 input/output blend by about $0 per 1M tokens. Exact savings depend on your input-vs-output ratio β€” use the cost calculator on this page for a workload-specific estimate.

What is the difference between Claude 3.7 Sonnet (thinking) and Sonar Pro Search?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet (thinking) comes from Anthropic; Sonar Pro Search comes from Perplexity. They differ in pricing, context window, and supported capabilities β€” see the side-by-side table on this page for the exact figures, refreshed nightly.

Keyboard shortcuts

?
Show this overlay
/
Focus the first form field
g h
Go to / (home)
g b
Go to /best-llm-for
g c
Go to /cost
g s
Go to /self-hosted
g x
Go to /compliance
Esc
Close any overlay

Inspired by Linear and GitHub conventions. The two-key sequences (g then h) work within ~1 second.