Model Comparison

Claude 3 Sonnet vs Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

Claude 3 Sonnet significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Phi-3.5-mini-instruct is 60.0x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

10 benchmarks

Claude 3 Sonnet outperforms in 9 benchmarks (ARC-C, BIG-Bench Hard, GPQA, GSM8k, HellaSwag, HumanEval, MGSM, MMLU, MMLU-Pro), while Phi-3.5-mini-instruct is better at 1 benchmark (MATH).

Claude 3 Sonnet significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue Mar 31 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct costs less

For input processing, Claude 3 Sonnet ($3.00/1M tokens) is 30.0x more expensive than Phi-3.5-mini-instruct ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude 3 Sonnet ($15.00/1M tokens) is 150.0x more expensive than Phi-3.5-mini-instruct ($0.10/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude 3 Sonnet is more expensive than Phi-3.5-mini-instruct.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Mar 31 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3 Sonnet
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.10
Best providerAzure
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude 3 Sonnet accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to Phi-3.5-mini-instruct's 128,000 tokens. Claude 3 Sonnet can generate longer responses up to 200,000 tokens, while Phi-3.5-mini-instruct is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude 3 Sonnet
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Tue Mar 31 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Claude 3 Sonnet supports multimodal inputs, whereas Phi-3.5-mini-instruct does not.

Claude 3 Sonnet can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude 3 Sonnet

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3 Sonnet is licensed under a proprietary license, while Phi-3.5-mini-instruct uses MIT.

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

Claude 3 Sonnet

Proprietary

Closed source

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3 Sonnet was released on 2024-02-29, while Phi-3.5-mini-instruct was released on 2024-08-23.

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct is 6 months newer than Claude 3 Sonnet.

Claude 3 Sonnet

Feb 29, 2024

2.1 years ago

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

Aug 23, 2024

1.6 years ago

5mo 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

Provider Availability

Claude 3 Sonnet is available from Anthropic, Bedrock, Google. Phi-3.5-mini-instruct is available from Azure.

Claude 3 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

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

azure logo
Azure
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.10/1M
* 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)
Supports multimodal inputs
Higher ARC-C score (93.2% vs 84.6%)
Higher BIG-Bench Hard score (82.9% vs 69.0%)
Higher GPQA score (40.4% vs 30.4%)
Higher GSM8k score (92.3% vs 86.2%)
Higher HellaSwag score (89.0% vs 69.4%)
Higher HumanEval score (73.0% vs 62.8%)
Higher MGSM score (83.5% vs 47.9%)
Higher MMLU score (79.0% vs 69.0%)
Higher MMLU-Pro score (56.8% vs 47.4%)
Microsoft
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights
Higher MATH score (48.5% vs 43.1%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3 Sonnet
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3 Sonnet vs Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

Claude 3 Sonnet significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude 3 Sonnet is made by Anthropic and Phi-3.5-mini-instruct is made by Microsoft. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude 3 Sonnet scores ARC-C: 93.2%, GSM8k: 92.3%, HellaSwag: 89.0%, MGSM: 83.5%, BIG-Bench Hard: 82.9%. Phi-3.5-mini-instruct scores GSM8k: 86.2%, ARC-C: 84.6%, RULER: 84.1%, PIQA: 81.0%, OpenBookQA: 79.2%.
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct is 30.0x cheaper for input tokens. Claude 3 Sonnet costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output via anthropic. Phi-3.5-mini-instruct costs $0.10/M input and $0.10/M output via azure.
Claude 3 Sonnet supports 200K tokens and Phi-3.5-mini-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 $0.10/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude 3 Sonnet is developed by Anthropic and Phi-3.5-mini-instruct is developed by Microsoft.