Skip to model comparison
AI Agent Store/Model comparisonsBuild an AI worker ↗
Anthropic · REASONING EFFORT GUIDE

Claude Sonnet 5.5
How much thinking?

Compare Extra high vs Max where tested. Find the effort setting that fits your task, and see how much extra reasoning changes the result.

SAME MODEL. DIFFERENT THINKING.

Choose a thinking level for Claude Sonnet 5.5

Download CSV ↓
LiveBench

AI Agent Store task-weighted category mix. An editorial selection aid, not a measured agent success rate; weights match our published Agent Fit methodology.

Thinking · Question set: 2026-06-25 · Reviewed 2026-10-15Check the source ↗
SUGGESTED SETTING TO TESTExtra high

Lowest tested effort within 1.0 points of the best tested general agent fit.

72.2 / 100
Exact best1.0 pts10 pts

Set 0 for the highest score. Increase the gap to explore cheaper or lighter options.

THE EFFORT CURVE

Does more thinking help?

● Near-best pickOrange = score decreased

025507510072.2Xhigh71.0Max
025507510072.2Xhigh71.0Max

Scores out of 100 · Full 0–100 scale · tap a point to select mode B. Cyan band: within 1.0 points of the best tested score.

COST DATA NOT AVAILABLE

This study has no comparable cost data.

The recommendation uses the lowest tested effort within your allowed score gap. That does not prove it is the cheapest or fastest.

Use the token calculator below with your own usage measurements. Effort labels alone do not tell us a token bill.

Estimate your own token costs ↓
Score difference · B minus A-1.2 pts

Noticeable gap · B scored lower

Highest minus lowest score in this study1.2 pts

Best minus lowest tested score

Highest observed score72.2

Extra high

We describe gaps under 1 point as small, 1–under 5 as noticeable, and 5 or more as large. These are reading aids, not proof that a difference would hold up in repeated tests. Equal scores can still hide different mistakes.

WHERE MORE SCORED LOWER

When more thinking scored lower

Extra high → Max-1.2 pts72.2 → 71.0 on general agent fit

These drops can reflect the tasks, variation between runs, testing tools or errors. A lower score alone does not prove the model was “overthinking.”
EVERY TESTED MODE

Results for each tested setting

2 modes · untested settings are left blank

Extra high

Suggested setting
72.2 / 100

0.0 pts vs Extra high

Max

A better tradeoff is available
71.0 / 100

-1.2 pts vs Extra high

Full benchmark table & exact configuration IDs

Swipe inside the table for all measures. Figures from different study selections are not directly comparable.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 · LiveBench · Thinking
EffortOverall benchmarkGeneral agent fitCoding agent fitResearch agent fitWriting & support fitReasoningCodingAgentic CodingMathematicsData AnalysisLanguageInstruction followingCost / taskMedian secondsOutput tokensExact source ID
Extra high77.872.264.480.678.186.888.939.396.778.683.470.5———claude-sonnet-5-5-xhigh-effort
Max75.771.072.273.070.591.691.456.396.159.578.056.8———claude-sonnet-5-5-max-effort
SCALE THE OBSERVED COST

Effort cost difference calculator

What would A versus B cost if you repeated this benchmark’s average workload?

A · Extra high—
B · Max—
Difference—This study did not report comparable costs

This source has no comparable dollar-cost observation. Use the token calculator below with your own usage; token counts alone cannot supply a full bill.

YOUR WORKLOAD

Reasoning-token cost calculator

Estimate the extra bill from thinking tokens. The starting token counts are editable examples, not measurements of Claude Sonnet 5.5. Rates start from the current model snapshot.

A · Extra high$40estimated monthly cost
B · Max$80estimated monthly cost

Mode B costs $40 more per month with these assumptions.

This estimate uses the token counts and prices you enter. Excludes retries, tools, caching, long-context premiums, hosting and taxes. Includes thinking in output billing; do not also include it in “visible output.” Check endpoint limits separately. Changing mode does not automatically predict tokens or quality.

READ ACROSS THE EVIDENCE

Claude Sonnet 5.5 effort benchmarks at a glance

Each card compares settings tested together in one study. Scores from different benchmarks or question sets measure different work and are not averaged together.

QUESTION SET · 2026-06-25

General tasks · LiveBench 2026-06-25 · Thinking

AI Agent Store task-weighted category mix. An editorial selection aid, not a measured agent success rate; weights match our published Agent Fit methodology.

Extra high · pick
72.2
Max
71.0

Near-best pick: Extra high within 1 point of the best score. Highest-to-lowest score gap: 1.2 points.

Explore this study ↗

Original source ↗

All results and the exact settings tested

A dash means the study did not report that result. This table compares only the versions and settings tested on the same questions in this study.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 · General tasks · LiveBench 2026-06-25 · Thinking · Thinking
Effort / budgetOverall benchmarkGeneral agent fitCoding agent fitResearch agent fitWriting & support fitReasoningCodingAgentic CodingMathematicsData AnalysisLanguageInstruction followingExact source configuration
Extra high77.872.264.480.678.186.888.939.396.778.683.470.5claude-sonnet-5-5-xhigh-effort
Max75.771.072.273.070.591.691.456.396.159.578.056.8claude-sonnet-5-5-max-effort

Download this study’s data (CSV) ↓

Reasoning effort, explained

Which Claude Sonnet 5.5 thinking level is most efficient?

Extra high is the lowest-effort option within 1 point of the best general agent fit in LiveBench. Max trails the best tested score by 1.2 points. This allows a score up to 1 point below the best result in the first listed study. Change the study, task and allowed score gap above to explore another comparison. It is a shortlist for testing your own workload.

Which Claude Sonnet 5.5 effort settings are compared?

Extra high, Max appear in the collected studies. Each chart only includes modes tested together in that study. These published labels do not establish that every endpoint or application exposes every setting.

Does more effort improve Claude Sonnet 5.5?

In LiveBench, Extra high to Max lowers the observed score by 1.2 points. The overall tested range is 1.2 points. These are observed differences, not proof that extra thinking caused the decline.

How much more does high effort cost for Claude Sonnet 5.5?

Use the A/B selector and measured-cost calculator when the source reports dollar costs. For your own agent, enter average input, visible output and thinking tokens in the token calculator. Higher effort is adaptive, so the label itself cannot tell you the bill. Missing costs stay missing.

Keep comparing

AI Agent Store · Model comparisons · Data reviewed 2026-10-15Sources, limitations & corrections ↗