Side-by-side comparison
Maestro Reasoning vs Sonar Deep Research
| Maestro Reasoning | Sonar Deep Research | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Arcee AI | Perplexity |
| Context window Maximum tokens (input + output) the model can process in a single request. Glossary → | 131,072 | 128,000 |
| Capabilities Optional capabilities the model advertises: vision (images), tools (function calling), json_mode (structured output). | text-only | text-only |
| Input $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens you send (prompt + context). Cheaper side highlighted. Glossary → | 0.9000 | 2.0000 |
| Output $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens the model generates. Output is normally 3–5× pricier than input. Glossary → | 3.3000 | 8.0000 |
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheaper, Maestro Reasoning or Sonar Deep Research?
Maestro Reasoning is cheaper than Sonar Deep Research on a 50/50 input/output blend by about $2.9 per 1M tokens. Exact savings depend on your input-vs-output ratio — use the cost calculator on this page for a workload-specific estimate.
Which has a larger context window, Maestro Reasoning or Sonar Deep Research?
Maestro Reasoning has the larger context window at 131k tokens versus 128k tokens for Sonar Deep Research. That means Maestro Reasoning can ingest about 1.0x as much text per request.
What is the difference between Maestro Reasoning and Sonar Deep Research?
Maestro Reasoning comes from Arcee AI; Sonar Deep Research comes from Perplexity. They differ in pricing, context window, and supported capabilities — see the side-by-side table on this page for the exact figures, refreshed nightly.