+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Claude 3 Sonnet vs Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Claude 3 Sonnet leads with 4.1% higher average benchmark score. Claude 3 Sonnet supports multimodal inputs. Claude 3 Sonnet is available on 3 providers. Both models have their strengths depending on your specific coding needs.
+
+
+
+
Anthropic
Claude 3 Sonnet was introduced as the balanced middle tier of the Claude 3 family, offering a combination of strong capabilities and operational speed. Designed to provide an optimal tradeoff between intelligence and performance for everyday tasks, it served as a versatile solution for a wide range of enterprise and consumer applications.
+
+
+
+
Microsoft
Phi-3.5 MoE was created using a mixture-of-experts architecture, designed to provide enhanced capabilities while maintaining efficiency through sparse activation. Built to combine the benefits of larger models with practical computational requirements, it represents Microsoft's exploration of efficient scaling techniques.
5 months newer
Claude 3 Sonnet
Anthropic
2024-02-29
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Microsoft
2024-08-23
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 10 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Claude 3 Sonnet
Average Score:73.3%(+4.1%)
+
+
+
+
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Average Score:69.3%
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Claude 3 Sonnet
3 providers
Anthropic
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Bedrock
Throughput: 120 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Claude 3 Sonnet
Avg Score:73.3%(+4.1%)
Providers:3
+
+
+
+
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Avg Score:69.3%
Providers:0