Model Comparison

Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Claude 3.5 Sonnet significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is 16.6x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

9 benchmarks

Claude 3.5 Sonnet outperforms in 9 benchmarks (AI2D, ChartQA, DocVQA, GPQA, MATH, MathVista, MGSM, MMLU, MMMU), while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Wed Apr 15 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct costs less

For input processing, Claude 3.5 Sonnet ($3.00/1M tokens) is 8.6x more expensive than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct ($0.35/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude 3.5 Sonnet ($15.00/1M tokens) is 37.5x more expensive than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct ($0.40/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude 3.5 Sonnet is more expensive than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Wed Apr 15 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Input tokens$0.35
Output tokens$0.40
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude 3.5 Sonnet accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to Llama 3.2 90B Instruct's 128,000 tokens. Claude 3.5 Sonnet can generate longer responses up to 200,000 tokens, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Wed Apr 15 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3.5 Sonnet is licensed under a proprietary license, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct uses Llama 3.2.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Proprietary

Closed source

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Llama 3.2

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.5 Sonnet was released on 2024-10-22, while Llama 3.2 90B Instruct was released on 2024-09-25.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet is 1 month newer than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Oct 22, 2024

1.5 years ago

3w newer
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Sep 25, 2024

1.6 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Claude 3.5 Sonnet is available from Anthropic, Bedrock, Google. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is available from DeepInfra, Bedrock, Fireworks, Together, Hyperbolic.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M
bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M
google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.35/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.40/1M
bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $0.72/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.72/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.89/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.89/1M
together logo
Together
Input Price:Input: $1.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M
hyperbolic logo
Hyperbolic
Input Price:Input: $2.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $2.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Higher AI2D score (94.7% vs 92.3%)
Higher ChartQA score (90.8% vs 85.5%)
Higher DocVQA score (95.2% vs 90.1%)
Higher GPQA score (67.2% vs 46.7%)
Higher MATH score (78.3% vs 68.0%)
Higher MathVista score (67.7% vs 57.3%)
Higher MGSM score (91.6% vs 86.9%)
Higher MMLU score (90.4% vs 86.0%)
Higher MMMU score (68.3% vs 60.3%)
Meta
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Claude 3.5 Sonnet significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude 3.5 Sonnet is made by Anthropic and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is made by Meta. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores GSM8k: 96.4%, DocVQA: 95.2%, AI2D: 94.7%, HumanEval: 93.7%, BIG-Bench Hard: 93.1%. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct scores AI2D: 92.3%, DocVQA: 90.1%, MGSM: 86.9%, MMLU: 86.0%, ChartQA: 85.5%.
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is 8.6x cheaper for input tokens. Claude 3.5 Sonnet costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output via anthropic. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct costs $0.35/M input and $0.40/M output via deepinfra.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet supports 200K tokens and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include context window (200K vs 128K), input pricing ($3.00 vs $0.35/M), licensing (Proprietary vs Llama 3.2). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is developed by Anthropic and Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is developed by Meta.