The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs LFM3-1.7B

Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads the LLM Stats Score 36.5 to 25.0.

Anthropic · Liquid AI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 36.5 to 25.0, ranking #99 overall.

In the 4 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins 4; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

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

Choose Claude Sonnet 4.6

  • overall performance matters — it scores 36.5 and ranks #99 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 4 of 4 exact shared results

Choose LFM3-1.7B

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

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Sonnet 4.6
Anthropic
LFM3-1.7B
Liquid AI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
36.5
#99
25.0
#191
Reasoning
37.6
#87
20.8
#216
Coding
25.0
#92
7.4
#218
Agents
23.6
#78
18.1
#97
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
4 of 4
0 of 4
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

3 shared
Index
Claude Sonnet 4.6
LFM3-1.7B
Math
34.7#51
7.6#285
Tool use
20.4#73
14.3#119
Long context
10.5#75
5.1#112
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

17 reported for Claude Sonnet 4.6 · 20 for LFM3-1.7B

4 shared

Claude Sonnet 4.6 outperforms in 4 benchmarks (GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, MCP Atlas, SWE-Bench Verified), while LFM3-1.7B is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue Nov 03 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 Sonnet 4.6 specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude Sonnet 4.6 specifies output context (64,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Input200,000 tokens
Output64,000 tokens
Liquid AI
LFM3-1.7B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Tue Nov 03 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Sonnet 4.6 supports multimodal inputs, whereas LFM3-1.7B does not.

Claude Sonnet 4.6 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Text
Images
Audio
Video

LFM3-1.7B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is licensed under a proprietary license, while LFM3-1.7B uses LFM Open License v1.0.

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

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Proprietary

Closed source

LFM3-1.7B

LFM Open License v1.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Sonnet 4.6 was released on 2026-02-17, while LFM3-1.7B was released on 2026-10-27.

LFM3-1.7B is 8 months newer than Claude Sonnet 4.6.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Feb 17, 2026

8 months ago

LFM3-1.7B

Oct 27, 2026

1 weeks ago

8mo 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?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Sonnet 4.6 and LFM3-1.7B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Sonnet 4.6
✓ Preferred
LFM3-1.7B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs LFM3-1.7B.

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or LFM3-1.7B?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads the LLM Stats Score 36.5 to 25.0. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is made by Anthropic and LFM3-1.7B is made by Liquid AI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Sonnet 4.6 compare to LFM3-1.7B in benchmarks?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores Tau2 Telecom: 97.9%, Tau2 Retail: 91.7%, GPQA: 89.9%, MMMLU: 89.3%, SWE-Bench Verified: 79.6%. LFM3-1.7B scores IFEval: 96.7%, Multi-IF: 89.1%, LiveCodeBench v6: 73.5%, IFBench: 73.0%, BFCL-V4: 71.4%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Sonnet 4.6 and LFM3-1.7B?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 supports 200K tokens and LFM3-1.7B 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 Sonnet 4.6 and LFM3-1.7B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (36.5 vs 25.0), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs LFM Open License v1.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Sonnet 4.6 and LFM3-1.7B?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is developed by Anthropic and LFM3-1.7B is developed by Liquid AI.

Related comparisons