Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 17, 2026

Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Llama 3.1 405B benchmark

Name: Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Llama 3.1 405B AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Anthropic) and Llama 3.1 405B (Meta) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 17, 2026. On preference Elo, Llama 3.1 405B is ahead by 8 points (1,370 vs 1,362; lmarena (Aug 17, 2026)). On SWE-bench coding, Claude 3.7 Sonnet resolves 70.3% versus 58.4% (swebench (Aug 17, 2026)). Claude 3.7 Sonnet streams faster (85 tok/s) while Llama 3.1 405B is the cheaper output token ($3.5/1M). Claude 3.7 Sonnet has the larger context window (200k tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Share Analysis:

WhatsApp Telegram X / Post LinkedIn Reddit

Anthropic

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Hybrid-reasoning Sonnet from 2025. Kept for historical compare pages.

Elo 1,362$15/1M out

Claude 3.7 Sonnet Reasoning Scaler & Token Billing Simulator

Param: thinking_budget

Reasoning models scale test-time compute by generating hidden chain-of-thought (CoT) tokens. These tokens are billed at standard output rates and directly expand latency (TTFT) in exchange for higher GPQA Diamond and SWE-bench Verified problem resolve rates.

Estimated TTFT

240 ms

1.0x (Standard eval)

CoT Thinking Tokens

~3,200

Billed as output tokens

Est. Cost / 1k Calls

$54.00

9.0x base invoice

STEM / SWE Boost

+5.2%

GPQA & SWE-bench scaling

Medium (16k budget) Operational Profile

Official evaluation benchmark budget for SWE-bench and LiveBench.

Direct Provider APIAnthropic

"thinking": {
  "type": "enabled",
  "budget_tokens": 16384
}

OpenRouter Unified APIUnified Gateway

"reasoning": {
  "effort": "medium",
  "max_tokens": 3200
}

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A

Model B

Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs GPT-5

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet (5)vsLlama 3.1 405B (5)

Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 5W (50%)Overall: Even matchupLlama 3.1 405B: 5W (50%)

← Claude 3.7 SonnetLlama 3.1 405B →

Llama 3.1 405B (3/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,362vs1,370

Coding Elo

—vs1,385

SWE-bench

70.3%vs58.4%

LiveBench

58.4%vs61.2%

GPQA Diamond

78.5%vs75.2%

Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 2WLlama 3.1 405B: 3W

Claude 3.7 Sonnet (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

85 tok/svs42 tok/s

Time to first token

240 msvs360 ms

Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 2WLlama 3.1 405B: 0W

Llama 3.1 405B (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$15/1Mvs$3.5/1M

Input price

$3/1Mvs$1.25/1M

Context window

200kvs128k

Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 1WLlama 3.1 405B: 2W

Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Dimensional AdvantageClaude 3.7 Sonnet 5/6

Preference Elo

Llama 3.1 405B

8 pts advantage

Throughput Speed

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

43 tok/s faster

Token Price Efficiency

Llama 3.1 405B

$11.50/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Elo

High is better

1,362

EloHigh is better

1,370+1%

Code Elo

High is better

—

Code EloHigh is better

1,385

LiveBench

High is better

58.4%

LiveBenchHigh is better

61.2%+5%

SWE-bench

High is better

+20%70.3%

SWE-benchHigh is better

58.4%

GPQA

High is better

+4%78.5%

GPQAHigh is better

75.2%

TTFT

Low is better

+50%240 ms

TTFTLow is better

360 ms

Speed

High is better

+102%85 tok/s

SpeedHigh is better

42 tok/s

In $

Low is better

$3.00 / 1M

In $Low is better

$1.25 / 1M+140%

Out $

Low is better

$15.00 / 1M

Out $Low is better

$3.50 / 1M+329%

Context

High is better

+56%200k

ContextHigh is better

128k

Interactive Simulator (USD)

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).

Save up to 71% with Llama 3.1 405B

Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo

Quick Presets:

Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out

RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)

Claude 3.7 Sonnet$330.00 / mo

In: $105Out: $225

Llama 3.1 405B$96.25 / mo

In: $43.75Out: $52.5

Estimated Cost Delta

Llama 3.1 405B is estimated to save $233.75/month ($2,805/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

1
Claude 3.7 Sonnet:Pick Claude 3.7 Sonnet when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
2
Llama 3.1 405B:Pick Llama 3.1 405B when you are optimizing output cost.
3
Claude 3.7 Sonnet:Pick Claude 3.7 Sonnet when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsClaude 3.7 Sonnet

Higher SWE-bench (70.3%).

High-volume chatLlama 3.1 405B

Lower output list price ($3.5/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIClaude 3.7 Sonnet

Lower TTFT (240 ms).

Long-document RAGClaude 3.7 Sonnet

Larger window (200k).

Screenshots / visionClaude 3.7 Sonnet

Claude 3.7 Sonnet is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Claude 3.7 Sonnet	Higher SWE-bench (70.3%).
High-volume chat	Llama 3.1 405B	Lower output list price ($3.5/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Claude 3.7 Sonnet	Lower TTFT (240 ms).
Long-document RAG	Claude 3.7 Sonnet	Larger window (200k).
Screenshots / vision	Claude 3.7 Sonnet	Claude 3.7 Sonnet is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news

newsFeb 25, 2025

Claude 3.7 Sonnet stays as a historical hybrid-reasoning baseline

2025 hybrid-reasoning Sonnet. Deprecated for buying, kept for old compare URLs and “what did 3.7 score?”

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/claude-3-7-sonnet-vs-llama-3-1-405b/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

Anthropic

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Elo 1,362

LiveBench58.4%

SWE-bench70.3%

Speed85 tok/s

Output cost$15/1M

Llama 3.1 405B

Elo 1,370

LiveBench61.2%

SWE-bench58.4%

Speed42 tok/s

Output cost$3.5/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Llama 3.1 405B?: Llama 3.1 405B has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,370). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Llama 3.1 405B?: Claude 3.7 Sonnet leads SWE-bench at 70.3% vs 58.4%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: Llama 3.1 405B output tokens are $3.5/1M versus $15/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Llama 3.1 405B?: Claude 3.7 Sonnet has the lower time-to-first-token (240 ms vs 360 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?: Claude 3.7 Sonnet accepts 200k tokens versus 128k.
Can I self-host either model?: Llama 3.1 405B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?: No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?: Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Llama 3.1 405B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Claude 3.7 Sonnet matchups →|All Llama 3.1 405B matchups →

Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Claude 3.5 Sonnet (previous sonnet)Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Claude Sonnet 4 (next sonnet)Llama 3.1 405B vs Llama 3.1 70B (next llama)Llama 4 Maverick vs Llama 3.1 405B Claude Opus 4.5 vs Llama 3.1 405B Claude Opus 4.6 vs Llama 3.1 405B

Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Llama 3.1 405B benchmark

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet (5)vsLlama 3.1 405B (5)

Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 5W (50%)Overall: Even matchupLlama 3.1 405B: 5W (50%)

← Claude 3.7 SonnetLlama 3.1 405B →

Llama 3.1 405B (3/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,362vs1,370

Coding Elo

—vs1,385

SWE-bench

70.3%vs58.4%

LiveBench

58.4%vs61.2%

GPQA Diamond

78.5%vs75.2%

Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 2WLlama 3.1 405B: 3W

Claude 3.7 Sonnet (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

85 tok/svs42 tok/s

Time to first token

240 msvs360 ms

Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 2WLlama 3.1 405B: 0W

Llama 3.1 405B (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$15/1Mvs$3.5/1M

Input price

$3/1Mvs$1.25/1M

Context window

200kvs128k

Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 1WLlama 3.1 405B: 2W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsClaude 3.7 Sonnet

Higher SWE-bench (70.3%).

High-volume chatLlama 3.1 405B

Lower output list price ($3.5/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIClaude 3.7 Sonnet

Lower TTFT (240 ms).

Long-document RAGClaude 3.7 Sonnet

Larger window (200k).

Screenshots / visionClaude 3.7 Sonnet

Claude 3.7 Sonnet is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Claude 3.7 Sonnet	Higher SWE-bench (70.3%).
High-volume chat	Llama 3.1 405B	Lower output list price ($3.5/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Claude 3.7 Sonnet	Lower TTFT (240 ms).
Long-document RAG	Claude 3.7 Sonnet	Larger window (200k).
Screenshots / vision	Claude 3.7 Sonnet	Claude 3.7 Sonnet is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Llama 3.1 405B?

Llama 3.1 405B has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,370). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.

Which is better at coding, Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Llama 3.1 405B?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet leads SWE-bench at 70.3% vs 58.4%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

Llama 3.1 405B output tokens are $3.5/1M versus $15/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.

Which is faster, Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Llama 3.1 405B?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet has the lower time-to-first-token (240 ms vs 360 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.

Which has the larger context window?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet accepts 200k tokens versus 128k.

Can I self-host either model?

Llama 3.1 405B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.

Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?

No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.

What does preference Elo mean on this page?

Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Llama 3.1 405B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet Reasoning Scaler & Token Billing Simulator

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Llama 3.1 405B

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Llama 3.1 405B

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Claude 3.7 Sonnet stays as a historical hybrid-reasoning baseline

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Llama 3.1 405B

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

Claude 3.7 Sonnet Reasoning Scaler & Token Billing Simulator

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Llama 3.1 405B

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Llama 3.1 405B

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Claude 3.7 Sonnet stays as a historical hybrid-reasoning baseline

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Llama 3.1 405B

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons