Apertus 8B Instruct vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Wins 0 of 5 areas
—
Wins 5 of 5 areas
Coding · Reasoning · Facts · Long documents · Following instructions
Claude 3.7 Sonnet is the stronger all-rounder.Apertus 8B Instruct is cheaper.
Scores updated · 13 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the five areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking02Claude 3.7 Sonnet2 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- CodingWriting and fixing software02Claude 3.7 Sonnet2 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up02Claude 3.7 Sonnet2 of 2 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01Claude 3.7 Sonnet1 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01Claude 3.7 Sonnet1 of 1 test
Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Apertus 8B Instruct costs 98% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude 3.7 Sonnet pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+56.1points ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+51.6points ahead
- Code for real scientific research problemsSciCode+36.2points ahead
Where Apertus 8B Instruct pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 13 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude 3.7 Sonnet
- SciCodeClaude 3.7 Sonnet by 36.24.140.3+36.2
- Terminal-Bench HardClaude 3.7 Sonnet by 21.2021.2+21.2
ReasoningClaude 3.7 Sonnet
- GPQA DiamondClaude 3.7 Sonnet by 51.625.677.2+51.6
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude 3.7 Sonnet by 4.759.7+4.7
- CritPttie00.9tie
FactsClaude 3.7 Sonnet
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude 3.7 Sonnet by 56.13.960+56.1
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude 3.7 Sonnet by 18.39.728+18.3
Following instructionsClaude 3.7 Sonnet
- IFBenchClaude 3.7 Sonnet by 25.922.448.3+25.9
Other results4 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA-OmniscienceClaude 3.7 Sonnet by 76.5-77.2-0.7+76.5
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Claude 3.7 Sonnet by 43.311.454.7+43.3
- AA Agentic IndexClaude 3.7 Sonnet by 33.23.837+33.2
- AA IntelligenceClaude 3.7 Sonnet by 12.94.817.7+12.9
Questions people ask
Which is better, Apertus 8B Instruct or Claude 3.7 Sonnet?
Claude 3.7 Sonnet wins all five areas where both have results: coding, reasoning, facts, long documents and following instructions. Apertus 8B Instruct wins none, but costs 98% less.
Which is better for coding?
Claude 3.7 Sonnet. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Apertus 8B Instruct wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Apertus 8B Instruct costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Claude 3.7 Sonnet costs $3.00 and $15.00. That makes Apertus 8B Instruct about 98% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 13 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 9 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 4 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.