Real head-to-head · same prompt, one shot

Claude Sonnet 5 vs Kilo Code

The agentic SWE frontier — 82% SWE-bench Verified, Dev Team mode. vs Fable 5-class intelligence at ~59% less. The split-the-cost play.

Claude Sonnet 5 · context1M tokens
Kilo Code · contextVaries (Kilo dispatches across models)
Claude Sonnet 5 · price$3 / $15 per M ($2/$10 intro)
Kilo Code · price~59% less than Fable 5 solo
Claude Sonnet 5 · vendorAnthropic
Kilo Code · vendorKilo

What I tested — same prompt, two models

I run the same fixed prompt set through every new model the day it drops — same string, one shot, single HTML file out — and I score the result 0–10 on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. Below is what came out when I gave the exact same prompts to Claude Sonnet 5 and Kilo Code, side by side, on 0 shared tasks inside the Agent Operating System.

Both models were given identical prompts inside the Agent Operating System — no help, no iteration, no "best of N" tricks. I run each prompt once, save the HTML file the model produces, and score it 0–10 on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. The scoring is mine. The verdicts below are pulled from my source comparison guides at agentos.guide where I publish every score and the reasoning behind it.

Claude Sonnet 5 · Reach for it in Agent OS when the job is iterative, tool-using software engineering. For one-shot visual builds, GLM 5.2 (free) beat it 4-1 here.

Kilo Code · Used inside Agent OS as a routing layer: Fable 5 generates the plan, cheaper models execute. Bench scoring pending a head-to-head comparison.

Side-by-side on 42 shared tasks

Click any cell to play that model's actual one-shot attempt. Medals are derived from my 0–10 scores per task (highest = 🥇, second = 🥈, third = 🥉).

Task ↓
Claude Sonnet 5
Kilo Code
Game
Claude Sonnet 5 on Arcade
— not attempted —
Game
Claude Sonnet 5 on Crypt
— not attempted —
Game
Claude Sonnet 5 on Dogfight
— not attempted —
Game
Claude Sonnet 5 on Doom
— not attempted —
Claude Sonnet 5 on Dragonflight
— not attempted —
Claude Sonnet 5 on Dragonrealm
— not attempted —
Game
Claude Sonnet 5 on Game
— not attempted —
Claude Sonnet 5 on Neonblaster
— not attempted —
Game
Claude Sonnet 5 on Neoncity
— not attempted —
Game
🥈Claude Sonnet 5 on Neonracer
— not attempted —
Claude Sonnet 5 on Nordiccrypt
— not attempted —
Game
🥇Claude Sonnet 5 on Outrun
— not attempted —
Game
🥈Claude Sonnet 5 on Pool
— not attempted —
Game
Claude Sonnet 5 on Racing
— not attempted —
Game
Claude Sonnet 5 on Raycaster
— not attempted —
Game
Claude Sonnet 5 on Rpg
— not attempted —
Game
Claude Sonnet 5 on Skyrim
— not attempted —
Claude Sonnet 5 on Twilightvale
— not attempted —
Game
Claude Sonnet 5 on Voxelcraft
— not attempted —
Page
Claude Sonnet 5 on Landing
— not attempted —
Page
Claude Sonnet 5 on Webos
— not attempted —
Sim
Claude Sonnet 5 on Blackhole
— not attempted —
Sim
Claude Sonnet 5 on Boids
— not attempted —
Sim
Claude Sonnet 5 on Cloth
— not attempted —

Strengths & weaknesses I logged

Claude Sonnet 5

Strengths

  • 82.1% SWE-bench Verified — first model past 80% on real GitHub-issue repair
  • Dev Team multi-agent mode + 1M context for repo-level agentic work
  • Precision on hard logic — won the raycaster the open-weight field kept botching

Trade-offs

  • One-shot creative-visual builds trail GLM 5.2 here (lost 4 of 5) — no iteration to catch its own bugs
  • A temporal-dead-zone bug blanked its N-body orbit sim on the first shot

Kilo Code

Strengths

  • Kilo's own rubric: Fable 5 plan = 9.1/10, GPT-5.5 plan = 8.3/10 — Kilo isolates where the intelligence actually lives
  • Plan quality stays high while execution cost drops
  • Drop-in for Agent OS — Kilo Split framework already wired

Trade-offs

  • Adds routing complexity — two model providers in one workflow
  • No per-task goldiebench head-to-heads yet

Pricing & context — the spec sheet

Spec Claude Sonnet 5 Kilo Code
VendorAnthropicKilo
Context window1,000,000 tokensVaries — Kilo splits planning from execution across multiple models
Price$3 / $15 per M ($2/$10 intro)~59% less than Fable 5 solo
Pricing detail$3.00 input / $15.00 output per million tokens; introductory $2.00/$10.00 through 2026-08-31.Kilo Code is a routing layer that splits planning (heavy model) from execution (cheaper model) so you get Fable-5-class plans driving GPT-5.5-class builds. Total spend lands at ~59% less than running Fable 5 end-to-end.
Release2026-06-302026-06-16
Bench coverage42/42 scored · avg 7.18/100/0 scored · avg —

The verdict — which should you pick?

Not enough scored shared tasks yet for a head-to-head average. The live demos for both are on the matrix above — play them and form your own opinion.

If you only run one of these inside your stack, the head-to-head average above is the call. If you can run both, my honest play is to wire Claude Sonnet 5 and Kilo Code both into the Agent Operating System and dispatch each from the kanban by task type — agentic software engineering — write / run / test / fix loops on real repos → Claude Sonnet 5, cost-conscious operators who run high-volume agent loops → Kilo Code. That's the same setup I run for the 3,600+ founders inside the AI Profit Boardroom.

FAQ — Claude Sonnet 5 vs Kilo Code

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 5 or Kilo Code?

On Goldie Bench, Claude Sonnet 5 averages no scored verdicts yet across the shared tasks, with 3 gold, 3 silver, 3 bronze overall. Kilo Code averages no scored verdicts yet, with 0 gold, 0 silver, 0 bronze. Not enough scored shared tasks yet to call a winner.

How much does Claude Sonnet 5 cost vs Kilo Code?

Claude Sonnet 5: $3.00 input / $15.00 output per million tokens; introductory $2.00/$10.00 through 2026-08-31. Kilo Code: Kilo Code is a routing layer that splits planning (heavy model) from execution (cheaper model) so you get Fable-5-class plans driving GPT-5.5-class builds. Total spend lands at ~59% less than running Fable 5 end-to-end.

What's the context window for Claude Sonnet 5 vs Kilo Code?

Claude Sonnet 5 has a 1,000,000 tokens context window. Kilo Code has a Varies — Kilo splits planning from execution across multiple models context window.

When should I pick Claude Sonnet 5 over Kilo Code?

Pick Claude Sonnet 5 for: Agentic software engineering — write / run / test / fix loops on real repos; Repo-level reasoning across a 1M-token context (Dev Team multi-agent mode); Precise logic — raycasters, physics — where one-shot open models slip. The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: One-shot creative-visual builds trail GLM 5.2 here (lost 4 of 5) — no iteration to catch its own bugs; A temporal-dead-zone bug blanked its N-body orbit sim on the first shot.

When should I pick Kilo Code over Claude Sonnet 5?

Pick Kilo Code for: Cost-conscious operators who run high-volume agent loops; Multi-step workflows where the plan is the expensive part; Teams already paying for Fable 5 who want to keep the plan but drop the execution bill. The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: Adds routing complexity — two model providers in one workflow; No per-task goldiebench head-to-heads yet.

How does Goldie Bench score Claude Sonnet 5 vs Kilo Code?

Every demo on this page was built by Julian Goldie inside the Agent Operating System — same fixed prompt for both models, one shot, single HTML file out. Each result gets a 0–10 score on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. The highest score on each task gets gold; second gets silver; third gets bronze. See methodology for full provenance.

The same stack Julian uses

Run this stack yourself.

Every demo on this bench was built inside the Agent Operating System — one prompt, one shot, single HTML file out. The Agent OS, the prompts, the templates, the weekly walkthroughs and 3,600+ founders shipping with it every day all live inside the AI Profit Boardroom.

3,600+founders
258documented wins
38countries
$59/momonthly