Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs phi-3-medium 14B

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 61.9 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 Anthropic

61.9

Rank #10 Confirmed

phi-3-medium 14B Microsoft

29.7

Rank #306 Reported

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher in 3 categories and phi-3-medium 14B in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads 87.9 to 27.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 95.6% for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and 27.6% for phi-3-medium 14B.
  • phi-3-medium 14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 5.5phi-3-medium 14B
ProviderAnthropicMicrosoft
Noometry Index61.929.7
Released2026-09-282024-04-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$10—
Results tracked3213

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 67.3 (#6), phi-3-medium 14B: 36.8 (#201)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5phi-3-medium 14B
FrontierCode52.1%—
CursorBench55.5%—
LMArena WebDev1774—
FrontierSWE61.9%—
SciCode61%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—37.6%
LMArena Coding1513—
BigCodeBench Complete—48.7%
ALE-Bench1,819—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 45.0 (#16), phi-3-medium 14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5phi-3-medium 14B
APEX-Agents75.5%—

Reasoning Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 54.0 (#28), phi-3-medium 14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5phi-3-medium 14B
Epoch Capabilities Index165.03121.23
NYT Connections (extended)80.5%—
CritPt31.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1495—
Mystery Game Puzzles65%—
Adversarial NLI—55.8%
BIG-Bench Hard—81.4%
HellaSwag—82.4%
WinoGrande—81.5%

Math Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 87.9 (#6), phi-3-medium 14B: 27.3 (#250)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5phi-3-medium 14B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)88.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 480.5%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
LMArena Math1510—
MATH Level 5—17.6%
FrontierMath Erdős2.9%—

Knowledge Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 66.0 (#12), phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#306)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5phi-3-medium 14B
GPQA Diamond95.6%27.6%
SimpleQA Verified46.5%—
LMArena Expert1540—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—91.6%
MMLU—78%
OpenBookQA—87.4%
TriviaQA—73.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 51.5 (#6), phi-3-medium 14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5phi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Vision1289—
Furniture Assembly75%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 55.3 (#30), phi-3-medium 14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5phi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Non-English1452—
LMArena Chinese1522—
LMArena Russian1451—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 78.3 (#11), phi-3-medium 14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5phi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Instruction Following1495—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 45.9 (#28), phi-3-medium 14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5phi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Longer Query1498—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 66.0 (#40), phi-3-medium 14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5phi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Text1471—
LMArena Creative Writing1465—
LMArena Multi-Turn1474—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 better than phi-3-medium 14B?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 61.9 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 or phi-3-medium 14B better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 67.3 versus 36.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 5.5 and phi-3-medium 14B share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 5.5 has 32 scored results on Noometry and phi-3-medium 14B has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper