Claude 3.5 Sonnet is the stronger all-rounder.
Scores updated · 9 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the one area 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.
Reasoning rests on a single test.
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.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude 3.5 Sonnet pulls ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+13.6points ahead
Where Hunyuan Large Instruct pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 9 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
Other results8 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.
- C-EvalHunyuan Large Instruct by 11.976.788.6+11.9
- MATHHunyuan Large Instruct by 6.371.177.4+6.3
- HumanEvalClaude 3.5 Sonnet by 3.793.790+3.7
- BBHClaude 3.5 Sonnet by 3.693.189.5+3.6
- Arena HardHunyuan Large Instruct by 2.679.281.8+2.6
- IFEvalClaude 3.5 Sonnet by 1.586.585+1.5
- MMLUHunyuan Large Instruct by 1.288.789.9+1.2
- MT-Benchtie8.89.4tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Hunyuan Large Instruct?
Claude 3.5 Sonnet wins the one area where both have results: reasoning. Hunyuan Large Instruct wins none.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 9 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 1 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 8 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.