Model Comparison

Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

Claude 3.7 Sonnet significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

2 benchmarks

Claude 3.7 Sonnet outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, MMMLU), while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sun Apr 05 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Sun Apr 05 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude 3.7 Sonnet specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude 3.7 Sonnet specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Input200,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Sun Apr 05 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Claude 3.7 Sonnet supports multimodal inputs, whereas Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct does not.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3.7 Sonnet is licensed under a proprietary license, while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct uses MIT.

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

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Proprietary

Closed source

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.7 Sonnet was released on 2025-02-24, while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct was released on 2024-08-23.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet is 6 months newer than Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Feb 24, 2025

1.1 years ago

6mo newer
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

Aug 23, 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

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Supports multimodal inputs
Higher GPQA score (84.8% vs 36.8%)
Higher MMMLU score (86.1% vs 69.9%)
Microsoft
Has open weights
AnthropicClaude 3.7 Sonnet
MicrosoftPhi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Compare in Playground

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

Claude 3.7 Sonnet significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude 3.7 Sonnet is made by Anthropic and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is made by Microsoft. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet scores MATH-500: 96.2%, IFEval: 93.2%, MMMLU: 86.1%, GPQA: 84.8%, TAU-bench Retail: 81.2%. Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct scores ARC-C: 91.0%, OpenBookQA: 89.6%, GSM8k: 88.7%, PIQA: 88.6%, RULER: 87.1%.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet supports 200K tokens and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet is developed by Anthropic and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is developed by Microsoft.