Side-by-side benchmark comparison across knowledge, coding, math, and reasoning.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 62 to 51. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 44 against 41. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is MMLU, 65 to 91.8. o1 does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
o1 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude 3.5 Sonnet is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use.
Pick Claude 3.5 Sonnet if you want the stronger benchmark profile. o1 only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
55.5
o1
83.8
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
44
o1
41
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
66
o1
74.3
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
83
o1
92.2
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is ahead overall, 62 to 51. The biggest single separator in this matchup is MMLU, where the scores are 65 and 91.8.
o1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 83.8 versus 55.5. Inside this category, MMLU is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 44 versus 41. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
o1 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 74.3 versus 66. Inside this category, AIME 2024 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
o1 has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 92.2 versus 83. Inside this category, IFEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.