Python code sample to interact with GPT 4

Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs GPT-4o: Key Differences and Comparisons

1. Coding Accuracy:
- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 92.0% accuracy on the HumanEval benchmark.
- GPT-4o: 90.2% accuracy on the HumanEval benchmark.

2. Agentic Coding Evaluation:
- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: Solved 64% of problems.
- Claude 3 Opus: Solved 38% of problems.

3. Latency:
- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 2x faster than Claude 3 Opus.
- GPT-4o: Faster than Claude 3.5 Sonnet.

4. Throughput:
- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: Improved throughput by approximately 3.43x from Claude 3 Opus.
- GPT-4o: Nearly the same throughput as Claude 3.5 Sonnet.

5. Precision:
- GPT-4o: Highest precision at 86.21%.
- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 85% precision.

6. Code Generation:
- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: Generated a fully functional tower defense game in Python.
- GPT-4o: Generated a basic example but required significant code assembly.

7. Story Generation:
- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: Created a humorous story with slapstick humor.
- GPT-4o: Created a children's story with one-liner jokes.

8. Contextual Understanding:
- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: Demonstrates strong contextual understanding and nuance.
- GPT-4o: Also exhibits strong contextual understanding but with some limitations.

9. Cost-Effectiveness:
- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: Priced at $3 per million input tokens and $15 per million output tokens.
- GPT-4o: Pricing not specified.

10. Availability:
- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: Available on Claude.ai, the Claude iOS app, and via the Anthropic API.
- GPT-4o: Pricing and availability not specified.

Conclusion

Claude 3.5 Sonnet outperforms GPT-4o in several key areas, including coding accuracy, agentic coding evaluation, and code generation. However, GPT-4o excels in precision and latency. Both models demonstrate strong contextual understanding and nuance but differ in their approach to storytelling and humor. Claude 3.5 Sonnet is more cost-effective and widely available, making it a more practical choice for many applications.