The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs MiniCPM-SALA

Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads the LLM Stats Score 19.4 to 12.7.

Anthropic · OpenBMB · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads the overall LLM Stats Score 19.4 to 12.7, ranking #189 overall.

The models split the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models evenly.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude 3.5 Sonnet

  • overall performance matters — it scores 19.4 and ranks #189 on LLM Stats

Choose MiniCPM-SALA

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Feb 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Anthropic
MiniCPM-SALA
OpenBMB
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
19.4
#189
12.7
#230
Reasoning
20.4
#171
14.2
#214
Coding
11.6
#141
21.1
#80
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 2
1 of 2
Input price
$3.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$15.00 / M
— / M
Context window
200,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
MiniCPM-SALA
Math
23.4#120
14.3#207
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

19 reported for Claude 3.5 Sonnet · 24 for MiniCPM-SALA

2 shared

Claude 3.5 Sonnet outperforms in 1 benchmarks (MMLU-Pro), while MiniCPM-SALA is better at 1 benchmark (HumanEval).

Both models are evenly matched across the benchmarks.

Fri Aug 28 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude 3.5 Sonnet specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude 3.5 Sonnet specifies output context (200,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
OpenBMB
MiniCPM-SALA
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Aug 28 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude 3.5 Sonnet supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiniCPM-SALA does not.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiniCPM-SALA

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3.5 Sonnet is licensed under a proprietary license, while MiniCPM-SALA uses Apache 2.0.

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

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Proprietary

Closed source

MiniCPM-SALA

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.5 Sonnet was released on 2024-10-22, while MiniCPM-SALA was released on 2026-02-11.

MiniCPM-SALA is 16 months newer than Claude 3.5 Sonnet.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Oct 22, 2024

1.8 years ago

MiniCPM-SALA

Feb 11, 2026

6 months ago

1.3yr newer

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

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude 3.5 Sonnet and MiniCPM-SALA side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet
✓ Preferred
MiniCPM-SALA
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs MiniCPM-SALA.

Which is better, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or MiniCPM-SALA?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads the LLM Stats Score 19.4 to 12.7. Claude 3.5 Sonnet is made by Anthropic and MiniCPM-SALA is made by OpenBMB. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude 3.5 Sonnet compare to MiniCPM-SALA in benchmarks?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores GSM8k: 96.4%, DocVQA: 95.2%, AI2D: 94.7%, HumanEval: 93.7%, BIG-Bench Hard: 93.1%. MiniCPM-SALA scores HumanEval: 95.1%, RULER 64k: 92.7%, RULER 128k: 89.4%, MBPP: 89.1%, RULER 512K: 87.1%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude 3.5 Sonnet and MiniCPM-SALA?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet supports 200K tokens and MiniCPM-SALA supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude 3.5 Sonnet and MiniCPM-SALA?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (19.4 vs 12.7), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude 3.5 Sonnet and MiniCPM-SALA?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet is developed by Anthropic and MiniCPM-SALA is developed by OpenBMB.

Related comparisons