Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4 vs Llama 3.2 1B

Claude Sonnet 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 85× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 4 Anthropic

40.8

Rank #145 Confirmed

Llama 3.2 1B Meta

20.1

Rank #354 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4 scores higher in 9 categories and Llama 3.2 1B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Claude Sonnet 4 leads 57.1 to 21.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 71.1% for Claude Sonnet 4 and 0.6% for Llama 3.2 1B.
  • Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper at $0.027 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Claude Sonnet 4.
  • Claude Sonnet 4 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 60K.
  • Llama 3.2 1B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 4 and Llama 3.2 1B specifications
Claude Sonnet 4Llama 3.2 1B
ProviderAnthropicMeta
Noometry Index40.820.1
Released2025-05-222024-09-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K60K
Max output64K54K
Input $ / M tokens$3$0.027
Output $ / M tokens$15$0.20
Results tracked5822

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 43.5 (#88), Llama 3.2 1B: 21.1 (#338)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Llama 3.2 1B
LMArena Coding14141070
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)64.9%—
Aider Polyglot61.3%—
SciCode40%—
GSO4.9%—
WeirdML46.1%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—8.2%
BigCodeBench Complete—11.3%
ALE-Bench655.35—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 38.5 (#31), Llama 3.2 1B: 14.6 (#150)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Llama 3.2 1B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—10.8%
TheAgentCompany33.1%—
Cybench35%—
DeepResearch Bench46.6%—
OSWorld43.9%—
BALROG—6.6%
METR Time Horizons62%—

Reasoning Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 22.9 (#187), Llama 3.2 1B: 16.2 (#308)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Llama 3.2 1B
LMArena Hard Prompts13721044
Epoch Capabilities Index141.69101.99
ARC-AGI-25.9%—
SimpleBench45.5%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark73%—
ARC-AGI-140%—
CritPt0.3%—
Chess Puzzles—0%
EnigmaEval3.1%—
DTBench77.1%—
LMCA29%—
ForecastBench60.2—

Math Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 43.3 (#80), Llama 3.2 1B: 10.4 (#313)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Llama 3.2 1B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202571.1%0.6%
LMArena Math13751086
Omni-MATH60.2%—
MATH Level 584.4%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)4.1%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 41.8 (#108), Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#312)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Llama 3.2 1B
GPQA Diamond79.2%23.9%
LMArena Expert13721007
Humanity's Last Exam7.8%—
MMLU-Pro84.3%—
Confabulations13.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.3%—
GPQA (HELM)70.6%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4: 26.2 (#121), Llama 3.2 1B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Llama 3.2 1B
LMArena Vision1191—
GeoBench37%—
VPCT34%—
MindCube44.8%—

Multilingual Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 46.7 (#156), Llama 3.2 1B: 23.8 (#292)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Llama 3.2 1B
LMArena Non-English1333973
LMArena Chinese1350959
LMArena German13311014
LMArena Russian1355941
LMArena French1363—
LMArena Japanese1302—
LMArena Korean1291—
LMArena Spanish1357—

Instruction Following Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 71.7 (#145), Llama 3.2 1B: 52.4 (#290)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Llama 3.2 1B
LMArena Instruction Following13761031
IFEval84%—

Long Context Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 33.7 (#259), Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#274)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Llama 3.2 1B
LMArena Longer Query13981050
Fiction.LiveBench46.9%—

Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 57.1 (#132), Llama 3.2 1B: 21.3 (#310)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4Llama 3.2 1B
LMArena Text13511055
LMArena Creative Writing13451033
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1483200
LMArena Multi-Turn13761030
Short-Story Creative Writing81.4%—
WildBench83.8%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 4 better than Llama 3.2 1B?

Claude Sonnet 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 85× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4 or Llama 3.2 1B?

Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper. It lists at $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 4 lists at $3 and $15.

Is Claude Sonnet 4 or Llama 3.2 1B better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.5 versus 21.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Sonnet 4 does, with 200K tokens against 60K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4 and Llama 3.2 1B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4 has 58 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 1B has 22.

Related comparisons

Go deeper