The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 58.1 to 1.9.

Anthropic · Microsoft · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 58.1 to 1.9, ranking #3 overall.

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

Choose Claude Sonnet 5.5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 58.1 and ranks #3 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Sonnet 5.5
Anthropic
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Microsoft
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
58.1
#3
1.9
#325
Reasoning
56.6
#3
1.4
#318
Coding
48.9
#2
-3.8
#261
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$2.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$10.00 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Math
36.9#34
4.3#286
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

47 reported for Claude Sonnet 5.5 · 31 for Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

No common benchmarks found

Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Phi-3.5-MoE-instructdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude Sonnet 5.5 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Claude Sonnet 5.5 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Tue Sep 29 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Sonnet 5.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct does not.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Sonnet 5.5 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 Sonnet 5.5

Proprietary

Closed source

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Sonnet 5.5 was released on 2026-09-28, while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct was released on 2024-08-23.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is 26 months newer than Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct.

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Sep 28, 2026

1 days ago

2.1yr newer
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

Aug 23, 2024

2.1 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Sonnet 5.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Claude Sonnet 5.5's training data extends to 2026-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct's cutoff date.

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Jun 2026

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Sonnet 5.5
✓ Preferred
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct.

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 58.1 to 1.9. Claude Sonnet 5.5 is made by Anthropic and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is made by Microsoft. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Sonnet 5.5 compare to Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct in benchmarks?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores BenchCAD (with Python tool): 96.3%, ArXivMath (with tools): 95.2%, Global-MMLU: 92.1%, MILU: 91.6%, SWE-bench Multilingual: 90.3%. Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct scores ARC-C: 91.0%, OpenBookQA: 89.6%, GSM8k: 88.7%, PIQA: 88.6%, RULER: 87.1%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 supports 1.0M 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.

What are the main differences between Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (58.1 vs 1.9), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is developed by Anthropic and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is developed by Microsoft.

Related comparisons