Model comparison
Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Llama 2-70B
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.4 to 24.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-70B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads 28.5 to 7.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 56.9% for Claude 3.5 Sonnet and 3.3% for Llama 2-70B.
- Llama 2-70B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Llama 2-70B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 34.4 | 24.1 |
| Released | 2024-06-20 | 2023-07-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 60 | 35 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.5 (#145), Llama 2-70B: 30.8 (#281)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1343 | 1079 |
| Aider Polyglot | 51.6% | — |
| GSO | 4.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 40% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 67.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 58.6% | — |
| CadEval | 48% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 81.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 74.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 32.1 (#61), Llama 2-70B: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 24% | — |
| Cybench | 17.5% | — |
| BALROG | 32.6% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 45.2% | — |
Reasoning Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 22.5 (#176), Llama 2-70B: 13.7 (#324)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1305 | 1073 |
| DTBench | 67.8% | 41.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.55 | 113.59 |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | 51.4 |
| SimpleBench | 41.4% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 0.9% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 56.7% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 55% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 64.9% |
| CommonsenseQA 2.0 | — | 50% |
| HellaSwag | — | 85.3% |
| LAMBADA | — | 78.9% |
| LiveBench | 59% | — |
| PIQA | — | 82.8% |
| WinoGrande | — | 80.2% |
Math Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 18.0 (#282), Llama 2-70B: 7.5 (#320)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 8.5% | 0% |
| LMArena Math | 1306 | 1091 |
| MATH Level 5 | 56.9% | 3.3% |
| Omni-MATH | 27.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 52.3% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 2.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 69.6% |
Knowledge Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 28.5 (#236), Llama 2-70B: 7.4 (#305)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 55.3% | 26.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1264 | 1039 |
| MMLU | 87.3% | 69.9% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 4.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 77.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 19.9% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 56.5% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 78.3% |
| BoolQ | — | 88.6% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 60.2% |
| TriviaQA | — | 87.6% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 26.0 (#115), Llama 2-70B: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1125 | — |
| Video-MME | 60% | — |
| GeoBench | 62% | — |
| VPCT | 33% | — |
Multilingual Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 43.4 (#180), Llama 2-70B: 27.9 (#269)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1283 | 1045 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1271 | 994 |
| LMArena French | 1304 | 1089 |
| LMArena German | 1297 | 1041 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1234 | 927 |
| LMArena Korean | 1200 | 964 |
| LMArena Russian | 1305 | 1083 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1289 | 1142 |
Instruction Following Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 69.0 (#177), Llama 2-70B: 55.1 (#273)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1297 | 1071 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 69.3% | — |
| IFEval | 85.5% | — |
Long Context Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.9 (#162), Llama 2-70B: 32.2 (#265)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1311 | 1062 |
Writing & Preference Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 53.0 (#159), Llama 2-70B: 32.5 (#274)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1298 | 1115 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1292 | 1075 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1326 | 1088 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 80.3% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1451 | — |
| WildBench | 79.2% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 53.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet better than Llama 2-70B?
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.4 to 24.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Llama 2-70B better for coding?
Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 30.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Llama 2-70B share?
24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.5 Sonnet has 60 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-70B has 35.