Model comparison
Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs phi-3-medium 14B
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.6 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.
MicrosoftSummary
- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher in 2 categories and phi-3-medium 14B in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads 28.6 to 9.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is MATH Level 5: 56.9% for Claude 3.5 Sonnet and 17.6% for phi-3-medium 14B.
- phi-3-medium 14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 3.5 Sonnet | phi-3-medium 14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 34.6 | 29.7 |
| Released | 2024-06-20 | 2024-04-23 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 60 | 13 |
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: 39.0 (#165), phi-3-medium 14B: 36.8 (#201)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.8% | 37.6% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 58.6% | 48.7% |
| Aider Polyglot | 51.6% | — |
| GSO | 4.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 40% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 67.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1342 | — |
| CadEval | 48% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 81.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 74.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 32.3 (#67), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 24% | — |
| Cybench | 17.5% | — |
| BALROG | 32.6% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 45.2% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 23.1 (#183), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.55 | 121.23 |
| SimpleBench | 41.4% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 0.9% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 56.7% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1305 | — |
| DTBench | 67.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 55% | — |
| Adversarial NLI | — | 55.8% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 81.4% |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | — |
| HellaSwag | — | 82.4% |
| LiveBench | 59% | — |
| WinoGrande | — | 81.5% |
Math phi-3-medium 14B leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 19.2 (#288), phi-3-medium 14B: 27.3 (#250)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| MATH Level 5 | 56.9% | 17.6% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 8.5% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 27.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 52.3% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1307 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 2.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
Knowledge Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 28.6 (#245), phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#306)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 55.3% | 27.6% |
| MMLU | 87.3% | 78% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 4.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 77.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 19.9% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 56.5% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1265 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 91.6% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 87.4% |
| TriviaQA | — | 73.9% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 26.5 (#120), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1125 | — |
| Video-MME | 60% | — |
| GeoBench | 62% | — |
| VPCT | 33% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 43.2 (#185), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1283 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1272 | — |
| LMArena French | 1305 | — |
| LMArena German | 1297 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1234 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1200 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1306 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1290 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 68.8 (#182), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 69.3% | — |
| IFEval | 85.5% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1297 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.9 (#167), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1311 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 52.9 (#164), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1298 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1292 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 80.3% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1451 | — |
| WildBench | 79.2% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1326 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 53.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet better than phi-3-medium 14B?
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.6 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet or phi-3-medium 14B better for coding?
Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.0 versus 36.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 3.5 Sonnet and phi-3-medium 14B share?
6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.5 Sonnet has 60 scored results on Noometry and phi-3-medium 14B has 13.