| Signal | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Delta | Claude Sonnet 4 |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 83 | -- | |
Benchmarks | 74 | -- | |
Pricing | 85 | -- | |
Context window size | 84 | -- | |
Recency | 59 | -16 | |
Output Capacity | 80 | -- | |
| Overall Result | 0 wins | of 6 | 1 wins |
Score History
75.1
current score
Claude Sonnet 4
right now
75.2
current score
Anthropic
Anthropic
| Metric | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Claude Sonnet 4 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 75 | 75 | Claude Sonnet 4 |
| Rank | #35 | #33 | Claude Sonnet 4 |
| Quality Rank | #35 | #33 | Claude Sonnet 4 |
| Adoption Rank | #35 | #33 | Claude Sonnet 4 |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 200K | 200K | -- |
| Pricing | $3.00/$15.00/M | $3.00/$15.00/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 83 | 83 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet |
| Benchmarks | 74 | 74 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet |
| Pricing | 85 | 85 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet |
| Context window size | 84 | 84 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet |
| Recency | 59 | 75 | Claude Sonnet 4 |
| Output Capacity | 80 | 80 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 75/100 (rank #35), placing it in the top 88% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 75/100 (rank #33), placing it in the top 89% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
Both models are priced similarly, so the decision comes down to quality and features rather than cost.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. Claude 3.7 Sonnet also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (200K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($15.00/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (75/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Claude Sonnet 4 are extremely close in overall performance (only 0.10000000000000853 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
Best for Quality
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
0% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Anthropic
| Capability | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Claude Sonnet 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Anthropic
Anthropic
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Claude Sonnet 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 200K | 200K |
| Max Output Tokens | 64,000 | 64,000 |
| Open Source | No | No |
| Created | Feb 24, 2025 | May 22, 2025 |
Claude Sonnet 4 scores 75/100 (rank #33) compared to Claude 3.7 Sonnet's 75/100 (rank #35), giving it a 0-point advantage. Claude Sonnet 4 is the stronger overall choice, though Claude 3.7 Sonnet may excel in specific areas like certain benchmarks.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet is ranked #35 and Claude Sonnet 4 is ranked #33 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (90%) from MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations, with capabilities and context window as tiebreakers (10%). Scores update hourly.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet is cheaper at $15.00/M output tokens vs Claude Sonnet 4's $15.00/M output tokens - 1.0x more expensive. Input token pricing: Claude 3.7 Sonnet at $3.00/M vs Claude Sonnet 4 at $3.00/M.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet has a larger context window of 200,000 tokens compared to Claude Sonnet 4's 200,000 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.