Coding
Directional only- Claude 4 Sonnet
- 72.7
- dots3-note Preview
- 71.7
- Weighted basis
- 1 vs 2 rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Claude 4 Sonnet vs dots3-note Preview
Updated August 14, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.
Decision reading
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
1 results are shared. Category rows based on different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
Which one for your work
Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.
Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
dots3-note Preview
dots3-note Preview has the larger documented context window.
Confidence: documented
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
The category averages use different weighted benchmark sets, so they are directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limited
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.
Confidence: limited
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. Claude 4 Sonnet does not fit this workload in one request. Claude 4 Sonnet has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. dots3-note Preview has no comparable published API token rate.
Confidence: rate-fallback
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
2 Claude 4 Sonnet only
1 Shared
30 dots3-note Preview only
- Shared results
- 1
- Claude 4 Sonnet only
- 2
- dots3-note Preview only
- 30
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 / 8
1 category uses different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row states whether both averages use the same weighted benchmark set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner in this template.
Agentic
Not comparable- Claude 4 Sonnet
- Not measured
- dots3-note Preview
- 83.3
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 1 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Reasoning
Not comparable- Claude 4 Sonnet
- Not measured
- dots3-note Preview
- 81.4
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 1 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Knowledge
Not comparable- Claude 4 Sonnet
- Not measured
- dots3-note Preview
- 52.6
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 1 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- Claude 4 Sonnet
- Not measured
- dots3-note Preview
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Claude 4 Sonnet
- Not measured
- dots3-note Preview
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- Claude 4 Sonnet
- Not measured
- dots3-note Preview
- 79.1
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 1 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Instruction following
Not comparable- Claude 4 Sonnet
- Not measured
- dots3-note Preview
- 85.1
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 2 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Claude 4 Sonnet | dots3-note Preview | Weighted basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 72.7 | 71.7 | Directional only1 vs 2 rows | Directional only |
| Agentic | Not measured | 83.3 | Not comparable0 vs 1 rows | Not comparable |
| Reasoning | Not measured | 81.4 | Not comparable0 vs 1 rows | Not comparable |
| Knowledge | Not measured | 52.6 | Not comparable0 vs 1 rows | Not comparable |
| Math | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | Not measured | 79.1 | Not comparable0 vs 1 rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | Not measured | 85.1 | Not comparable0 vs 2 rows | Not comparable |
Shape of the matched evidence
Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.
Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.
SWE-bench Verified
Coding
Claude 4 Sonnet: 72.7%dots3-note Preview: 78.4%Normalized gap 5.7Claude 4 Sonnet source dots3-note Preview source
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.
Chat turn
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
- Claude 4 Sonnet
- $0.0105
- Fits in one request
- dots3-note Preview
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
dots3-note Preview has no comparable published API token rate.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- Claude 4 Sonnet
- $0.195
- Fits in one request
- dots3-note Preview
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
dots3-note Preview has no comparable published API token rate.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- Claude 4 Sonnet
- $0.81
- Does not fit in one request
- Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
- dots3-note Preview
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
- Cached-input rate unavailable
Claude 4 Sonnet does not fit this workload in one request. Claude 4 Sonnet has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. dots3-note Preview has no comparable published API token rate.
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationClaude 4 Sonnetdots3-note Preview
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Claude 4 Sonnet
200K
dots3-note Preview
API model ID
Claude 4 Sonnet
Not sourced
dots3-note Preview
Not sourced
Cached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
Claude 4 Sonnet
Not published
dots3-note Preview
No comparable hosted API rate
dots3-note Preview model cardDocumented inputs
Claude 4 Sonnet
Not sourced
dots3-note Preview
Not sourced
Documented outputs
Claude 4 Sonnet
Not sourced
dots3-note Preview
Not sourced
Provider availability
Claude 4 Sonnet
Not sourced
dots3-note Preview
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
Claude 4 Sonnet
Non-Reasoning
dots3-note Preview
Reasoning
Weight access
Claude 4 Sonnet
Proprietary
dots3-note Preview
Open Weight
License
Claude 4 Sonnet
Proprietary
dots3-note Preview
Open Weight
Release date
Claude 4 Sonnet
2025-05-01
dots3-note Preview
2026-08-14
If you already use one of these models
- Deployment change
- The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
- Quality signal
- At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
- Workload cost
- A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
- Context tradeoff
- dots3-note Preview has the larger documented window (512K).
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence33 rows
Agentic
Gert Labs
Claude 4 Sonnet39.66%Sourcedots3-note Preview—Not directly comparable
JobBench
Claude 4 Sonnet18.4%Sourcedots3-note Preview—Not directly comparable
Claw-Eval
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview73.4%SourceNot directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview75.1%SourceNot directly comparable
Toolathlon-Verified
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview55.6%SourceNot directly comparable
skillsBench
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview52.8%SourceNot directly comparable
APEX-Agents
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview30.8%SourceNot directly comparable
BrowseComp
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview83.3%SourceNot directly comparable
HLE w/ tools
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview52.6%SourceNot directly comparable
DeepSearchQA
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview92.1%SourceNot directly comparable
WideResearch
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview78.9%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
SWE-bench Verified
Claude 4 Sonnet72.7%Sourcedots3-note Preview78.4%Sourcedots3-note Preview leads this result
Codeforces
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview3056.0SourceNot directly comparable
LiveCodeBench v6
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview91.5%SourceNot directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview75.1%SourceNot directly comparable
SWE Multilingual
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview75.7%SourceNot directly comparable
SWE-bench Pro
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview61%SourceNot directly comparable
NL2Repo
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview49.8%SourceNot directly comparable
Reasoning
ARC-AGI-2
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview81.4%SourceNot directly comparable
Knowledge
HLE
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview52.6%SourceNot directly comparable
Math
IMOAnswerBench
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview90.9%SourceNot directly comparable
Multimodal
SimpleVQA
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview72.5%SourceNot directly comparable
MMMU-Pro
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview79.1%SourceNot directly comparable
MathVision
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview87.7%SourceNot directly comparable
ZeroBench
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview19.0%SourceNot directly comparable
CharXiv w/o tools
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview83.1%SourceNot directly comparable
GDP.pdf (no tools)
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview60.7%SourceNot directly comparable
PerceptionBench
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview53.4%SourceNot directly comparable
BabyVision
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview50.0%SourceNot directly comparable
MMVU
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview79.9%SourceNot directly comparable
VideoMMMU
Claude 4 Sonnet—dots3-note Preview86.8%SourceNot directly comparable
Instruction following
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Claude 4 Sonnet or dots3-note Preview?
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.
Which is better for coding, Claude 4 Sonnet or dots3-note Preview?
The current coding averages use different weighted benchmark sets, so BenchLM does not name a winner from them. Read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude 4 Sonnet or dots3-note Preview?
The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted agentic tasks basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a agentic tasks winner.
Which costs less, Claude 4 Sonnet or dots3-note Preview?
Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.
Which has the larger context window, Claude 4 Sonnet or dots3-note Preview?
dots3-note Preview has the larger documented context window: 512K, compared with 200K.
Related comparisons
Last updated August 14, 2026
Watch Claude 4 Sonnet vs dots3-note Preview
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.