Fronset Benchmark

Claude Sonnet 5.5 at a glance

Good enough on 24/54 tasks at the 90% bar. Best value on 0 tasks. Best fit for: Long-form Content Generation, Social & Promotional Content.

Provider
Anthropic
Model name
claude-sonnet-5-5
Cost mode:
Qualifies on
24 / 54 tasks (at 90% bar)
Best value on
0 tasks

Cost vs quality across all tasks

0%25%50%75%100%78910Quality score (7–10)Cost-efficiency vs best value (1.0 = best value)Claim Continuity Classification — quality 8.72, 30.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPublic Response Generation — quality 7.69, 31.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionVoice Profile Generation — quality 8.92, 26.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPromotional Campaign Generation — quality 7.78, 17.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPromotional Message Generation — quality 8.42, 24.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionCapability Category Matching — quality 8.84, 34.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionEvidence Grounded Claim Generation — quality 8.21, 24.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionMetadata Paragraph Rewriting — quality 7.80, 22.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionStructured Output Extraction — quality 9.88, 45.7x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionBatch Text Translation — quality 8.86, 36.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionBench Hypothesis Post Generation — quality 8.78, 20.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionContent To Image Prompt Generation — quality 8.76, 31.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionReport Executive Summary Generation — quality 8.06, 35.5x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionResearch Query Generation — quality 7.17, 29.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionProfile Pool Matching — quality 8.25, 34.5x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionEngagement Opportunity Triage — quality 8.49, 36.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionSocial Post Portfolio Selection — quality 8.59, 18.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionCommunity Content Promotion Generation — quality 7.82, 2.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionResearch Community Selection — quality 7.09, 5.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionReference Preserving Analytical Writing — quality 8.50, 17.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionMulti Perspective Decision Synthesis — quality 8.34, 16.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionTopic Cluster Labeling — quality 8.42, 18.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionVisual Theme Configuration Generation — quality 8.36, 46.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionProfiled Document Analysis — quality 8.43, 12.5x the cost of the best-value good-enough option

within ~1.3× of the best-value model · 1.3–2× · >2× · ★ this model is the best-value pick on that task. Top-right = best quadrant. Only tasks where this model qualifies at the 90% bar are plotted.

Per-task breakdown

TaskCategoryQuality (% of best)ConfidenceOverpay
Community Content Promotion GenerationSocial & Promotional Content91%MEDIUM2.8x
Research Community SelectionRelevance, Classification & Matching91%MEDIUM5.9x
Profiled Document AnalysisFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions95%MEDIUM13x
Multi Perspective Decision SynthesisFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions94%MEDIUM16x
Reference Preserving Analytical WritingLong-form Content Generation92%MEDIUM17x
Promotional Campaign GenerationSocial & Promotional Content97%MEDIUM17x
Topic Cluster LabelingTopic Organization & Clustering95%HIGH18x
Social Post Portfolio SelectionRelevance, Classification & Matching98%HIGH19x
Bench Hypothesis Post GenerationSocial & Promotional Content99%RANKED21x
Metadata Paragraph RewritingInfrastructure & Utility93%RANKED22x
Promotional Message GenerationSocial & Promotional Content98%HIGH24x
Evidence Grounded Claim GenerationContent Summarization & Synthesis96%HIGH24x
Voice Profile GenerationLong-form Content Generation92%HIGH26x
Research Query GenerationInfrastructure & Utility91%MEDIUM29x
Claim Continuity Classification bestRelevance, Classification & Matching100%HIGH30x
Public Response GenerationSocial & Promotional Content91%MEDIUM31x
Content To Image Prompt GenerationInfrastructure & Utility98%RANKED32x
Profile Pool MatchingRelevance, Classification & Matching95%MEDIUM35x
Capability Category MatchingRelevance, Classification & Matching100%MEDIUM35x
Report Executive Summary GenerationContent Summarization & Synthesis94%HIGH35x
Batch Text TranslationInfrastructure & Utility96%HIGH36x
Engagement Opportunity TriageRelevance, Classification & Matching96%MEDIUM37x
Structured Output ExtractionStructured Data & Fact Extraction99%RANKED46x
Visual Theme Configuration GenerationLong-form Content Generation93%HIGH46x

Overpay — how much more you pay by running this model instead of the best-value model that clears the quality bar on that task (marked ★). "16x" means you overpay 16× — the same output for 16× the best-value good-enough option; ★ means this model is that option (no overpayment). Confidence — how sure we are about the quality score (more judgments + more agreement = higher confidence): RANKED many independent judges scored this model's outputs and their agreement is very high (most confident) — HIGH many judges have scored it and they mostly agree (well-pinned) — MEDIUM enough judges have weighed in to publish, but they disagree more than we'd like (treat with a small grain of salt). LOW-confidence cells are hidden everywhere on the site. See the methodology for the exact thresholds.