Migrating from Opus to Sonnet: When the Cheaper Model Wins

Table of Contents

1. The Real Economics of Model Selection
2. Understanding the Opus vs Sonnet Trade-Off
3. The Migration Framework: Step by Step
4. Benchmarking Your Workloads
5. Safe Migration Patterns
6. Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them
7. When to Stay with Opus
8. Monitoring and Rollback Strategy
9. Scaling Your Migration Across Teams
10. Looking Ahead: Model Release Cycles

---

The Real Economics of Model Selection

Every engineering team at a Sydney AI agency or growing startup faces the same question: should we use Opus or Sonnet? The answer isn’t about which model is “better”—it’s about which model delivers the right outcome at the lowest total cost.

For most teams, the answer is Sonnet. Not because Opus is bad, but because Sonnet has crossed a threshold where it handles 80% of production workloads with 40–60% lower token costs and faster response latency. That’s a compounding advantage over thousands of API calls per day.

But migration isn’t a flip-the-switch decision. You need a repeatable framework to test, validate, and roll out model changes safely. This guide gives you that framework—one you can run every time Anthropic releases a new model through 2027.

At PADISO, we’ve built this process across dozens of AI automation projects for Australian founders, operators, and enterprise teams. Whether you’re running agentic AI vs traditional automation workflows, managing aged care documentation automation systems, or deploying 3PL operations automation, the same principles apply: measure first, migrate gradually, monitor relentlessly.

Why This Matters Now

Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Opus 4.7 represent a turning point. The gap in reasoning quality between them has narrowed significantly, while the cost and speed gap has widened. According to Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Opus 4.6 analysis, Sonnet is now the default recommendation for the vast majority of tasks.

For a team running 100,000 API calls per day across multiple agents and workflows, switching from Opus to Sonnet can save $5,000–$15,000 per month in token costs alone. That’s $60,000–$180,000 per year. For a seed-stage startup, that’s runway. For a mid-market operator, that’s budget freed up for other modernisation projects.

But if you migrate carelessly—swapping models without testing, without monitoring, without a rollback plan—you’ll trade cost savings for quality degradation, missed SLAs, and angry customers. The framework below prevents that.

---

Understanding the Opus vs Sonnet Trade-Off

Before you migrate, you need to understand what you’re trading.

Token Costs

Sonnet costs roughly 40–50% less per token than Opus. Input tokens cost less, output tokens cost less. If your workloads are token-heavy (long context windows, multi-turn conversations, large document processing), the savings compound quickly.

Example: A customer support agent that processes 50,000 requests per month, averaging 8,000 tokens per request:

• Opus: 50,000 × 8,000 tokens × $0.015 per 1K tokens = $6,000/month
• Sonnet: 50,000 × 8,000 tokens × $0.003 per 1K tokens = $1,200/month
• Monthly saving: $4,800
• Annual saving: $57,600

Those numbers are real. And they scale.

Latency

Sonnet is faster. Time-to-first-token (TTFT) is lower, and end-to-end response time is typically 20–30% faster. For user-facing applications, that’s a material improvement in perceived performance.

For background jobs and batch processing, latency matters less. But for real-time agent interactions, chatbots, and synchronous API calls, Sonnet’s speed is a feature.

Quality and Reasoning

Opus was designed for complex reasoning tasks. It has a larger context window (200K tokens) and was trained to handle harder problems. But “harder” doesn’t mean “all tasks.” For most production workloads—classification, extraction, summarisation, code generation, customer support—Sonnet is indistinguishable from Opus in quality.

Where Opus still wins: multi-step reasoning over very long contexts, novel problem-solving, and edge cases. If your workload involves that, stay with Opus. If it doesn’t, migrate.

According to Claude Opus 4.7 deep dive analysis, Sonnet is better for latency-sensitive tasks and should be the default for most agentic workflows.

Context Window

Opus has 200K token context. Sonnet has 200K token context in recent versions. This distinction used to matter more; it’s less of a differentiator now. If you’re not using the full context window, context size is a non-issue.

---

The Migration Framework: Step by Step

Here’s the repeatable process we use at PADISO. You can run this every time a new model releases.

Step 1: Inventory Your Workloads

List every place you call Claude. Be specific:

• Customer support agent: 50K calls/month, 8K avg tokens, Opus
• Document classification: 100K calls/month, 2K avg tokens, Opus
• Code generation backend: 10K calls/month, 5K avg tokens, Opus
• Internal analytics agent: 5K calls/month, 12K avg tokens, Opus

Include:

• API call frequency
• Average token usage (input + output)
• Current model
• Current monthly cost
• SLA (response time requirement)
• Quality metrics (accuracy, error rate, user satisfaction)

This inventory is your baseline. You’ll measure against it.

Step 2: Categorise by Risk and Opportunity

Not all workloads are equal. Create a 2×2 matrix:

High Frequency + High Cost (migrate first)

• Customer support: 50K calls/month, $6K/month on Opus
• Document processing: 100K calls/month, $12K/month on Opus

High Frequency + Low Cost (safe to migrate)

• Classification: 100K calls/month, $0.2K/month on Opus
• Tagging: 200K calls/month, $0.4K/month on Opus

Low Frequency + High Cost (test carefully)

• Complex reasoning: 500 calls/month, $2K/month on Opus
• Strategic planning: 200 calls/month, $1K/month on Opus

Low Frequency + Low Cost (migrate last or skip)

• Internal tools: 100 calls/month, $0.05K/month on Opus
• Experiments: 50 calls/month, $0.02K/month on Opus

Prioritise the high-frequency, high-cost workloads. That’s where you’ll see the biggest ROI from migration.

Step 3: Define Success Metrics

Before you migrate a single workload, define what “success” looks like. Common metrics:

• Cost: X% reduction in token spend
• Latency: <Y% increase in response time
• Quality: >Z% accuracy/pass rate on validation set
• User satisfaction: No degradation in NPS or support tickets
• Error rate: <A% increase in errors or hallucinations

Example for customer support agent:

• Cost: ≥40% reduction
• Latency: <15% increase in TTFT
• Quality: ≥95% accuracy on intent classification
• Error rate: <2% increase in misclassified requests

Write these down. You’ll use them to decide whether to commit to the migration.

Step 4: Create a Test Dataset

You can’t benchmark in production. Build a representative test set:

• For customer support: 500 real customer messages, labelled with correct intent
• For document processing: 100 real documents with ground truth extractions
• For code generation: 50 real coding tasks from your backlog
• For classification: 1,000 examples from your production logs

Make sure the test set is:

• Representative: It matches the distribution of production traffic
• Labelled: You know the correct answer
• Diverse: It includes edge cases, not just happy paths
• Frozen: Don’t change it mid-test

The test set is your source of truth. Everything else is noise.

Step 5: Run Parallel Benchmarks

Don’t migrate yet. Run both models side-by-side on your test set:

for each test case:
  call Opus with prompt
  call Sonnet with same prompt
  measure:
    - response time
    - token usage
    - output quality (accuracy, correctness)
    - cost

Run this 2–3 times to smooth out variance. Record everything.

Use the official Claude API migration guide to ensure you’re calling both models correctly.

Step 6: Analyse the Results

Pull the data. Compare:

Metric	Opus	Sonnet	Delta	Pass?
Avg latency (ms)	450	350	-22%	✓
Avg tokens/call	8,000	8,200	+2.5%	✓
Cost/call	$0.12	$0.025	-79%	✓
Accuracy	96.2%	95.8%	-0.4%	✓
Error rate	1.1%	1.3%	+0.2%	✓

If Sonnet meets or exceeds your success metrics, proceed to Step 7. If not, investigate why. Maybe your prompt needs adjustment. Maybe Sonnet isn’t the right fit for this workload. That’s fine—stay with Opus.

Step 7: Deploy to Staging

Move the test to a staging environment that mirrors production:

• Same traffic volume (or a subset)
• Same prompts and system instructions
• Same downstream systems
• Same monitoring and alerting

Run Sonnet in staging for 1–2 weeks. Monitor:

• Error rates
• User-reported issues
• Latency
• Token usage
• Cost

If everything looks good, proceed to Step 8. If problems emerge, fix the prompt, adjust the test set, or decide to stay with Opus.

Step 8: Gradual Production Rollout

Don’t flip a switch. Roll out Sonnet gradually:

• Week 1: 10% of traffic
• Week 2: 25% of traffic
• Week 3: 50% of traffic
• Week 4: 100% of traffic

At each step, monitor the same metrics. If error rates spike or users complain, roll back immediately. If everything is stable, move to the next step.

For high-stakes workloads (medical, financial, legal), this rollout might take 6–8 weeks. For low-stakes workloads (internal tools, experiments), you can compress it to 2 weeks.

Step 9: Monitor and Optimise

After full rollout, keep monitoring for 4 weeks. Look for:

• Drift in quality metrics
• Changes in error patterns
• User feedback
• Cost trends

If you see unexpected degradation, investigate. Maybe your prompt needs fine-tuning. Maybe edge cases are emerging. Fix them.

Once you’re confident, declare the migration complete and move to the next workload.

---

Benchmarking Your Workloads

Benchmarking is where most teams go wrong. They run a quick test, see that Sonnet is slightly cheaper, and flip the switch. Then production breaks, and they spend weeks debugging.

Do benchmarking properly.

Build a Benchmarking Harness

Write a small script that:

1. Loads your test set
2. Calls Opus with each test case, records response and metrics
3. Calls Sonnet with each test case, records response and metrics
4. Compares outputs and calculates quality metrics
5. Generates a report

Example pseudocode:

test_cases = load_test_set('customer_support_500.json')
opus_results = []
sonnet_results = []

for case in test_cases:
    # Opus
    opus_start = time()
    opus_response = call_claude(model='opus-4-1', prompt=case['prompt'])
    opus_latency = time() - opus_start
    opus_quality = evaluate_quality(opus_response, case['ground_truth'])
    opus_results.append({
        'latency': opus_latency,
        'tokens': opus_response['usage']['total_tokens'],
        'quality': opus_quality,
        'cost': calculate_cost(opus_response['usage'])
    })
    
    # Sonnet
    sonnet_start = time()
    sonnet_response = call_claude(model='sonnet-4-0', prompt=case['prompt'])
    sonnet_latency = time() - sonnet_start
    sonnet_quality = evaluate_quality(sonnet_response, case['ground_truth'])
    sonnet_results.append({
        'latency': sonnet_latency,
        'tokens': sonnet_response['usage']['total_tokens'],
        'quality': sonnet_quality,
        'cost': calculate_cost(sonnet_response['usage'])
    })

# Generate report
report = compare_results(opus_results, sonnet_results)
print(report)

Run this 2–3 times. Average the results.

Measure Quality Properly

Quality metrics depend on your task:

Classification: Accuracy, precision, recall, F1 score

accuracy = (correct_predictions) / (total_predictions)

Extraction: Exact match, partial match, token-level F1

if extracted_value == ground_truth:
    score = 1.0
elif extracted_value in ground_truth or ground_truth in extracted_value:
    score = 0.5
else:
    score = 0.0

Generation: BLEU, ROUGE, human evaluation

For customer support responses, have a human rate Opus vs Sonnet on:
- Relevance (1–5)
- Tone (1–5)
- Helpfulness (1–5)
- Accuracy (1–5)

Code generation: Does it compile? Does it pass tests?

if code_compiles and all_tests_pass:
    score = 1.0
elif code_compiles and most_tests_pass:
    score = 0.5
else:
    score = 0.0

Don’t just eyeball outputs. Measure them.

Account for Variance

LLM outputs vary. Run each test case multiple times and average the results. This smooths out noise.

If Sonnet’s quality is 95.2% and Opus is 96.1%, the difference might be noise. Run 10 more iterations. If the gap persists, it’s real. If it disappears, it was noise.

Document Everything

Save your benchmarking results to a spreadsheet or database:

• Date of benchmark
• Model versions tested
• Test set (size, source, distribution)
• Results (latency, tokens, quality, cost)
• Notes (any issues, anomalies, assumptions)

You’ll want to refer back to this when the next model releases in 3 months.

---

Safe Migration Patterns

Once you’ve benchmarked and validated, how do you actually migrate production traffic safely?

Pattern 1: Feature Flag

Wrap the model selection in a feature flag:

if feature_flag.is_enabled('use_sonnet_for_support_agent'):
    model = 'sonnet-4-0'
else:
    model = 'opus-4-1'

response = call_claude(model=model, prompt=prompt)

This lets you roll out to 10% of users, then 25%, then 50%, then 100% without redeploying code. If problems emerge, flip the flag off and everyone goes back to Opus.

Use your feature flag platform (LaunchDarkly, Statsig, Unleash, etc.) for this. Don’t hardcode it.

Pattern 2: Canary Deployment

Route a small percentage of traffic to Sonnet, monitor it closely, then expand:

upstream claude {
    server opus-4-1-api weight=90;
    server sonnet-4-0-api weight=10;
}

Monitor error rates, latency, and user complaints. If all is well after 24 hours, shift to 25%/75%. After 48 hours, shift to 50%/50%. After 72 hours, shift to 100%/0%.

If problems emerge at any step, roll back to 100% Opus immediately.

Pattern 3: Shadow Mode

Call both models, but only return Sonnet’s response to users. Log Opus’s response for comparison:

sonnet_response = call_claude(model='sonnet-4-0', prompt=prompt)
opus_response = call_claude(model='opus-4-1', prompt=prompt)  # shadow call

log_comparison(sonnet=sonnet_response, opus=opus_response)

return sonnet_response  # to user

This is expensive (you’re paying for both models), but it gives you perfect data on whether Sonnet is working correctly before you commit. Run shadow mode for 1–2 weeks, then flip to Sonnet-only.

Pattern 4: A/B Test

For user-facing features, run a proper A/B test:

• Control group (50%): Opus
• Treatment group (50%): Sonnet

Measure user satisfaction, error rates, and business metrics (conversion, retention, etc.) for both groups. If Sonnet wins, roll out to everyone. If Opus wins, stay with Opus.

This is the gold standard for safety, but it requires more infrastructure.

Pattern 5: Batch Processing

For non-real-time workloads, migrate in batches:

1. Run a batch of 1,000 requests on Sonnet
2. Compare outputs to Opus baseline
3. If quality is good, commit the batch
4. Move to next batch

This is slow but safe. Useful for document processing, data extraction, and other batch jobs.

---

Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them

Pitfall 1: Migrating Without Benchmarking

You skip the test set, skip the staging environment, and just flip the switch in production. Sonnet works fine for 95% of your requests, but fails on edge cases. Your error rate spikes. Customers complain. You spend 3 days debugging and rolling back.

How to avoid it: Always benchmark. Always test in staging. Always roll out gradually.

Pitfall 2: Using the Wrong Test Set

You benchmark on 100 “happy path” examples, all of which Sonnet handles perfectly. Then you deploy to production, and Sonnet fails on edge cases (unusual inputs, complex reasoning, adversarial prompts) that weren’t in your test set.

How to avoid it: Build a diverse test set. Include edge cases, failures, and unusual inputs. Make sure it’s representative of production traffic.

Pitfall 3: Ignoring Latency

Sonnet is faster on average, but sometimes it’s slower. You don’t notice because you’re only looking at average latency. Then a customer complains about slow responses at peak traffic, and you realise Sonnet’s tail latency is worse than Opus.

How to avoid it: Measure latency percentiles (p50, p95, p99), not just average. Make sure Sonnet’s tail latency is acceptable.

Pitfall 4: Changing Prompts During Migration

You decide to “optimise” your prompt while migrating to Sonnet. Now you don’t know if quality degradation is due to the model change or the prompt change. You can’t roll back cleanly.

How to avoid it: Keep prompts constant during migration. Test prompt changes separately, on their own schedule.

Pitfall 5: Not Monitoring After Rollout

You complete the Sonnet migration, declare victory, and move on. Three weeks later, error rates start creeping up. By the time you notice, you’ve lost 100 customers.

How to avoid it: Monitor for at least 4 weeks after full rollout. Watch for drift in quality metrics, error patterns, and user feedback.

Pitfall 6: Assuming One-Size-Fits-All

You migrate your entire platform to Sonnet because it worked for your customer support agent. But your code generation agent needs Opus’s reasoning power. Now you’ve degraded quality on a critical workload.

How to avoid it: Evaluate each workload independently. Some might stay on Opus. That’s fine.

---

When to Stay with Opus

Sonnet is cheaper and faster, but it’s not always the right choice. Stay with Opus if:

Complex Multi-Step Reasoning

If your task requires 5+ steps of reasoning over a large context window, Opus is more reliable. Example: strategic planning, complex analysis, novel problem-solving.

Test this carefully. Sonnet might surprise you.

Very Long Context Windows

If you’re regularly using 150K+ tokens of context, Opus’s larger context window (200K) gives you more headroom. Sonnet also has 200K in recent versions, so this is less of a differentiator than it used to be.

High-Stakes Domains

Medicine, law, finance, aviation—if a mistake is expensive or dangerous, Opus’s extra reasoning power might be worth the cost. Test thoroughly before deciding.

Regulatory or Compliance Requirements

Some regulated industries require using the “most capable” model available. Check your compliance requirements. If you need to use Opus, use Opus. The cost difference is probably not material compared to the cost of non-compliance.

Workloads Where Cost Doesn’t Matter

If a workload costs $100/month on Opus and $30/month on Sonnet, the savings are trivial. The effort to migrate might not be worth it. Stay on Opus and focus on higher-impact migrations.

---

Monitoring and Rollback Strategy

You’ve deployed Sonnet to production. Now what?

Set Up Monitoring

Monitor these metrics continuously:

Quality metrics:

• Accuracy / correctness
• Error rate
• Hallucination rate (if applicable)
• User satisfaction (NPS, ratings, complaints)

Performance metrics:

• Latency (p50, p95, p99)
• Token usage
• API error rate
• Cost per request

Business metrics:

• Conversion rate (if applicable)
• Customer churn
• Support tickets
• Revenue impact

Set up alerts for each metric. If accuracy drops below 95%, alert. If latency exceeds 500ms, alert. If cost per request increases by 10%, alert.

Create a Rollback Plan

You need to be able to rollback in minutes, not hours:

1. Instant rollback: Feature flag that switches all traffic back to Opus
2. Gradual rollback: Canary deployment that reduces Sonnet traffic by 10% every 5 minutes
3. Emergency rollback: Manual override that bypasses all checks and goes straight to Opus

Test the rollback procedure before you need it. Make sure it works.

Define Rollback Triggers

When do you rollback?

• Accuracy drops below 95% for 10 consecutive minutes
• Error rate exceeds 5% for 5 consecutive minutes
• Latency p99 exceeds 1 second for 15 consecutive minutes
• More than 10 user complaints in 1 hour
• Cost per request increases by 20% or more
• Any critical bug discovered

Write these down. Make them objective, not subjective.

Post-Incident Review

If you rollback, investigate why. Was it a prompt issue? A test set issue? A Sonnet limitation? Document your findings and fix the root cause before trying again.

Use this as a learning opportunity, not a failure.

---

Scaling Your Migration Across Teams

If you’re a large organisation with multiple teams using Claude, you need a coordinated migration strategy.

Establish a Model Selection Committee

Bring together representatives from:

• Engineering (performance, quality)
• Product (user experience, business metrics)
• Finance (cost)
• Security/Compliance (regulatory requirements)

This committee reviews benchmark results, approves migrations, and handles exceptions.

Create a Migration Playbook

Document the process (the framework above) and share it with all teams. Include:

• Step-by-step instructions
• Template for benchmark results
• Monitoring checklist
• Rollback procedure
• Common pitfalls and how to avoid them

Make it easy for teams to follow the process correctly.

Centralise Model Management

Consider using a model routing layer that lets you switch models globally without code changes:

# All teams call the same function
response = claude_call(
    task='customer_support',
    prompt=prompt,
    context=context
)

# The function routes to the right model based on config
def claude_call(task, prompt, context):
    model = get_model_for_task(task)  # Opus or Sonnet
    return call_claude(model=model, prompt=prompt)

This lets you migrate all customer support agents to Sonnet with a single config change, no code deploys needed.

Share Benchmark Results

When one team successfully migrates to Sonnet, share the results with other teams. This accelerates adoption and builds confidence.

Create a shared spreadsheet or dashboard showing:

• Workload
• Model
• Cost per request
• Latency
• Quality metrics
• Date of migration

This becomes your source of truth for model selection.

Automate Benchmark Running

Set up a CI/CD pipeline that automatically benchmarks new model versions against your test sets. When Anthropic releases Claude 5.0 in 6 months, you’ll have benchmark results within hours, not days.

name: Model Benchmark
on:
  schedule:
    - cron: '0 0 * * 0'  # Weekly
jobs:
  benchmark:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v2
      - name: Run benchmarks
        run: python benchmark.py
      - name: Upload results
        run: python upload_results.py

---

Looking Ahead: Model Release Cycles

Claude evolves fast. Anthropic releases new models every 3–6 months. Your migration framework needs to be repeatable, not a one-time effort.

Expect Frequent Model Releases

Between now and 2027, expect:

• Claude 4.8 or 4.9 (reasoning improvements)
• Claude 5.0 (major capability jump)
• Claude 5.1 or 5.2 (incremental improvements)
• Possibly new model families (specialist models for code, vision, etc.)

Each release will raise the question: should we migrate?

Build for Change

Design your systems to make model changes easy:

1. Centralise model configuration: All model names and parameters in one place
2. Version your prompts: Keep a history of prompt versions with their associated models
3. Automate benchmarking: Run benchmarks automatically when new models release
4. Use feature flags: Make model selection a feature flag, not a code change
5. Monitor continuously: Track quality metrics for every model in production

Establish a Model Review Cadence

Every quarter (or when a new model releases):

1. Benchmark the new model against your test sets
2. Compare to current production models
3. Identify workloads that could benefit from migration
4. Prioritise based on cost savings and risk
5. Plan migrations for the next quarter

Make this a routine part of your engineering calendar, not a surprise.

Stay Informed

Follow Anthropic’s model releases and updates. Subscribe to:

• Official Anthropic API updates
• Claude community forums
• AI engineering blogs and newsletters

You want to know about new models and deprecations before they affect your production systems.

Plan for Deprecation

Older Claude models will eventually be deprecated. According to Claude Sonnet 4 and Opus 4 deprecation guide, Sonnet 4 and Opus 4 are being retired by June 15, 2026. You need a migration plan well before that date.

Add deprecation dates to your model inventory:

Model	Current Status	Deprecation Date	Migration Plan
Claude Opus 4.1	Production	June 2026	Migrate to Opus 4.7 by Q1 2026
Claude Sonnet 4.0	Production	June 2026	Migrate to Sonnet 4.6 by Q1 2026
Claude Haiku 3	Testing	TBD	Evaluate for cost-sensitive workloads

Don’t wait until June 2026 to start migrating. Start now.

---

Implementing This at Your Organisation

The framework above is detailed, but implementation is straightforward. Here’s how to get started:

Week 1: Inventory and Planning

1. List all Claude API calls in your system
2. Categorise by frequency, cost, and risk
3. Define success metrics for migration
4. Identify the top 3 workloads to migrate first

Week 2: Benchmarking

1. Build test sets for the top 3 workloads
2. Run parallel benchmarks (Opus vs Sonnet)
3. Analyse results
4. Decide: migrate or stay?

Week 3: Staging

1. Deploy Sonnet to staging environment
2. Run 1–2 weeks of testing
3. Monitor for issues
4. Prepare for production rollout

Week 4+: Production Rollout

1. Deploy with feature flag
2. Roll out gradually (10% → 25% → 50% → 100%)
3. Monitor continuously
4. Declare success or rollback

Total time: 4–6 weeks for your first migration. Subsequent migrations will be faster as you refine the process.

For teams managing agentic AI production horror stories, this disciplined approach prevents the costly failures that plague careless deployments.

Getting Help

If you need support with model migration, benchmarking, or AI strategy and readiness, PADISO’s Sydney-based team can help. We’ve built this framework across dozens of projects and can accelerate your migration while ensuring safety and quality.

Our AI advisory services Sydney team specialises in exactly this kind of work—helping Australian startups and enterprises make smart decisions about AI models, architecture, and deployment.

---

Summary and Next Steps

Migrating from Opus to Sonnet is not a binary decision. It’s a disciplined process:

1. Inventory your workloads
2. Benchmark both models on representative test sets
3. Test in staging before production
4. Roll out gradually with monitoring
5. Monitor continuously and rollback if needed
6. Repeat every time a new model releases

Done right, this migration saves significant cost (40–60% per token) and improves latency (20–30% faster) with minimal risk.

Done wrong, it degrades quality, breaks production, and wastes weeks on debugging.

The difference is discipline. Use the framework above.

Your Next Steps

1. This week: Inventory your Claude API usage. List every workload, frequency, cost, and current model.
2. Next week: Pick your top 3 highest-cost workloads and build test sets for them.
3. Week 3: Run parallel benchmarks. See where Sonnet wins and where Opus is needed.
4. Week 4: Deploy Sonnet to staging for your first workload. Run 1–2 weeks of testing.
5. Week 5+: Roll out to production gradually. Monitor relentlessly.

If you’re building agentic AI systems, refer back to our agentic AI vs traditional automation comparison to ensure you’re using the right architecture. And if you’re running complex reasoning tasks, check out the agentic coding showdown between Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-5.5 to see where each model excels.

For detailed migration guidance, the Claude Opus 4.5 migration skill provides one-shot migration guides for prompts and code. And the official Claude API migration guide has the canonical reference for all model versions.

The model landscape is evolving rapidly. Stay informed, benchmark regularly, and migrate deliberately. Your future self (and your cost budget) will thank you.

Ready to get started? Build that test set this week.