Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 5 vs Soofi S 30B-A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 5 #29 (Estimated); Soofi S 30B-A3B unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Sonnet 5 and Soofi S 30B-A3B share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 36 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 5; 8 to Soofi S 30B-A3B.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Claude Sonnet 5 only
- 36
- Soofi S 30B-A3B only
- 8
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Claude Sonnet 5 makes more sense if knowledge is the priority or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile; Soofi S 30B-A3B 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 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 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 Soofi S 30B-A3B 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 $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Soofi S 30B-A3B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Claude Sonnet 5 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Soofi S 30B-A3B 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.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5 | Soofi S 30B-A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Sonnet 5$2 input / $10 output | Soofi S 30B-A3B$0 input / $0 output | Soofi S 30B-A3B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Sonnet 5Not available | Soofi S 30B-A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Sonnet 5Not available | Soofi S 30B-A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Sonnet 51M | Soofi S 30B-A3B1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Soofi S 30B-A3B | 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% | — | Not comparable |
| 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 |
Coding10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Soofi S 30B-A3B | 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 |
| HumanEvalSource | — | 73.8% | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeClaude Sonnet 5 wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Soofi S 30B-A3B | 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 |
| GPQASource | — | 43.4% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 43.4% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 51.4% | Not comparable |
| AGIEvalSource | — | 66.9% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Soofi S 30B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GSM8KSource | — | 86.1% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude Sonnet 5 or Soofi S 30B-A3B?
Claude Sonnet 5 and Soofi S 30B-A3B 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 knowledge tasks, Claude Sonnet 5 or Soofi S 30B-A3B?
Claude Sonnet 5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 57.4 versus 49.9. Soofi S 30B-A3B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
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.