+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Claude Sonnet 4 vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Claude Sonnet 4 leads with 21.4% higher average benchmark score. Claude Sonnet 4 offers 72.0K more tokens in context window than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is $17.25 cheaper per million tokens. Overall, Claude Sonnet 4 is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4 was created as the balanced offering in the Claude 4 family, designed to provide strong intelligence with practical speed and cost efficiency. Built to serve as a versatile workhorse for diverse applications, it balances advanced capabilities with operational considerations for everyday enterprise and consumer use.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B was developed as a flagship-tier open-source model, designed to provide advanced capabilities with 90 billion parameters. Built to serve applications requiring high-quality reasoning and generation, it represents a powerful option within the Llama 3.2 series for demanding tasks.
7 months newer
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Meta
2024-09-25
Claude Sonnet 4
Anthropic
2025-05-22
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Claude Sonnet 4
Input:$3.00
Output:$15.00
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Input:$0.35
Output:$0.40($17.25 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 2 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Claude Sonnet 4
Average Score:74.9%(+21.4%)
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Average Score:53.5%
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Claude Sonnet 4
4 providers
Anthropic
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
Bedrock
Throughput: 101 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
ZeroEval
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
+
+
+
+
Claude Sonnet 4
Avg Score:74.9%(+21.4%)
Providers:4
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Avg Score:53.5%
Providers:5