Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
66
Exaone 4.0 32B
65
Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Exaone 4.0 32B only becomes the better choice if you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Knowledge
+1.6 difference
Math
+1.7 difference
Claude Sonnet 4.5
Exaone 4.0 32B
$3 / $15
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
200K
128K
Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Exaone 4.0 32B only becomes the better choice if you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 finishes one point ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 66 to 65. That is enough to call, but not enough to treat as a blowout. This matchup comes down to a few meaningful edges rather than one model dominating the board.
Claude Sonnet 4.5's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 87 against 85.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is AIME 2025, 87% to 85.3%.
Exaone 4.0 32B is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Sonnet 4.5 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. Claude Sonnet 4.5 gives you the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for Exaone 4.0 32B.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 66 to 65. The biggest single separator in this matchup is AIME 2025, where the scores are 87% and 85.3%.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 83.4 versus 81.8. Exaone 4.0 32B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 87 versus 85.3. Inside this category, AIME 2025 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.