Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Nanbeige4.1-3B
Wins 6 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 0 of 6 areas
—
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the stronger all-rounder.
Scores updated · 16 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six 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 thinking30Claude Sonnet 4.63 of 3 tests
- CodingWriting and fixing software20Claude Sonnet 4.62 of 2 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own20Claude Sonnet 4.62 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up20Claude Sonnet 4.62 of 2 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Claude Sonnet 4.61 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10Claude Sonnet 4.61 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.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude Sonnet 4.6 pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+31points ahead
- Code for real scientific research problemsSciCode+23.5points ahead
- Very hard expert questions across many subjectsHumanity's Last Exam+22.7points ahead
Where Nanbeige4.1-3B pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 16 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Sonnet 4.6
- Terminal-Bench HardClaude Sonnet 4.6 by 53530+53
- SciCodeClaude Sonnet 4.6 by 23.550.126.6+23.5
AgentsClaude Sonnet 4.6
- GDPValClaude Sonnet 4.6 by 36.736.70+36.7
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingClaude Sonnet 4.6 by 34.434.40+34.4
ReasoningClaude Sonnet 4.6
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Sonnet 4.6 by 22.733.610.9+22.7
- CritPtClaude Sonnet 4.6 by 3.13.10+3.1
- GPQA DiamondClaude Sonnet 4.6 by 2.687.584.9+2.6
FactsClaude Sonnet 4.6
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Sonnet 4.6 by 3140.99.9+31
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Sonnet 4.6 by 9.751.641.9+9.7
Following instructionsClaude Sonnet 4.6
- IFBenchClaude Sonnet 4.6 by 21.256.635.4+21.2
Other results5 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 Sonnet 4.6 by 54.712.2-42.5+54.7
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Claude Sonnet 4.6 by 54.175.721.6+54.1
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Sonnet 4.6 by 53.4639.6+53.4
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Sonnet 4.6 by 33.133.10+33.1
- AA IntelligenceClaude Sonnet 4.6 by 21.730.18.4+21.7
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Nanbeige4.1-3B?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins all six areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, long documents and following instructions. Nanbeige4.1-3B wins none.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Sonnet 4.6. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Nanbeige4.1-3B wins none.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 16 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 11 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 5 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.