Side-by-side benchmark comparison across knowledge, coding, math, and reasoning.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 83 to 28. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Sonnet 4.5's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 68.7 against 54.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HumanEval, 87 to 54.8.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.1. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Claude Sonnet 4.5 gives you the larger context window at 200K, compared with 64K for Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.1.
Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.1 only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
78.8
Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.1
71.4
Claude Sonnet 4.5
68.7
Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.1
54.8
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is ahead overall, 83 to 28. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HumanEval, where the scores are 87 and 54.8.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 78.8 versus 71.4. Inside this category, MMLU is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 68.7 versus 54.8. Inside this category, HumanEval 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.