Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 5 vs Holo3-122B-A10B
Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 5 #29 (Estimated); Holo3-122B-A10B unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Sonnet 5 and Holo3-122B-A10B share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 35 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 5; 0 to Holo3-122B-A10B.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 1
- Claude Sonnet 5 only
- 35
- Holo3-122B-A10B only
- 0
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Claude Sonnet 5 makes more sense if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window; Holo3-122B-A10B is the better fit if you want the cheaper token bill or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Claude Sonnet 5 and Holo3-122B-A10B finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Claude Sonnet 5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.40 input / $3.00 output per 1M tokens for Holo3-122B-A10B. That is roughly 3.3x on output cost alone. Claude Sonnet 5 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Holo3-122B-A10B is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Claude Sonnet 5 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 64K for Holo3-122B-A10B.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude Sonnet 5 | Δ | Holo3-122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Claude Sonnet 581.9 | Margin← 3.0 | Holo3-122B-A10B78.9 |
| Coding | Claude Sonnet 576.7 | MarginNo overlap | Holo3-122B-A10BNot measured |
| Knowledge | Claude Sonnet 557.4 | MarginNo overlap | Holo3-122B-A10BNot measured |
| Multimodal | Claude Sonnet 588.3 | MarginNo overlap | Holo3-122B-A10BNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
OSWorld-Verified
AgenticA 81.2%B 78.8%Winner: Claude Sonnet 5Δ 2.4OSWorld-Verified: Claude Sonnet 5 scored 81.2%; Holo3-122B-A10B scored 78.8%. Claude Sonnet 5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5 | Holo3-122B-A10B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Sonnet 5$2 input / $10 output | Holo3-122B-A10B$0.4 input / $3 output | Holo3-122B-A10B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Sonnet 5Not available | Holo3-122B-A10BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Sonnet 5Not available | Holo3-122B-A10BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Sonnet 51M | Holo3-122B-A10B64K | Claude Sonnet 5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticClaude Sonnet 5 wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Holo3-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 80.4% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 84.7% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 57.4% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 81.2% | 78.8% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1607 | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 46.7% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 55.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 1388 | — | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 39.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | 44.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 90.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 28.2% | — | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | 80.5% | — | Not comparable |
Coding9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Holo3-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 85.2% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 63.2% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 78.3% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultimodalSource | 28.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 80.4% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | 42.7% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 61.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 71.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 53.6% | — | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Holo3-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| HLESource | 57.4% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 43.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 53.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 91.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 39.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 15.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 38.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 37.3% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude Sonnet 5 or Holo3-122B-A10B?
Claude Sonnet 5 and Holo3-122B-A10B are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Sonnet 5 or Holo3-122B-A10B?
Claude Sonnet 5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.9 versus 78.9. Inside this category, OSWorld-Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.