Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Sarvam 105B

Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Sarvam 105B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 68 to 60. 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 60.8 against 45. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 77.2% to 45%. Sarvam 105B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

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 Sarvam 105B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Sarvam 105B 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 Sarvam 105B.