StableLM 3B vs Claude 4
Comprehensive side-by-side comparison of pricing, performance benchmarks, and capabilities
At a Glance
Best Overall Performance
Claude 4
Higher overall benchmarks
Best for Coding
Claude 4
88% coding score
Best for Reasoning
Claude 4
90% reasoning score
Best MMLU Score
Claude 4
90.2% general knowledge
Compare Different Models
Detailed Comparison
| Feature | StableLM 3B | Claude 4 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Provider | Stability AI | Anthropic | — |
| Context Window | 8k | 256k | — |
|
MMLU Score
General knowledge & reasoning | 75% | 90.2% | Claude 4 |
|
Coding Score
Code generation & debugging | 72% | 88% | Claude 4 |
|
Reasoning Score
Logic & problem-solving | 74% | 90% | Claude 4 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2025 | — |
| Vision Support | — | ✓ Yes | — |
| Function Calling | ✓ Yes | ✓ Yes | — |
Performance Comparison
MMLU (General Knowledge)
Difference: 15.2%Coding Performance
Difference: 16.0%Reasoning & Logic
Difference: 16.0%Expert Analysis
Performance Analysis
Claude 4 outperforms across 3 of 3 benchmarks, with particularly strong coding abilities (88%).
Final Verdict
Our comprehensive recommendation based on all factors
Claude 4 excels in coding benchmarks, outperforming StableLM 3B by 16.0 points—ideal for developers seeking top-tier code generation. Organizations with demanding workloads will benefit from Claude 4's capabilities for routine and specialized tasks.
Our Recommendation
Enterprise teams and applications requiring maximum accuracy should choose Claude 4 for mission-critical deployments where performance is paramount.
Best For These Use Cases
StableLM 3B Excels At:
- Creative content generation
- Research assistants
- Self-hosted experimentation
- Lightweight chatbots
- Prototype testing
Claude 4 Excels At:
- Legal document drafting
- Research summarization
- Enterprise knowledge management
- Compliance AI assistants
- Creative writing
Strengths & Weaknesses
StableLM 3B
Strengths
- • Open weights
- • Easy fine-tuning
- • Good creative outputs
- • Community-driven
Considerations
- • Short context
- • Limited multimodal support
- • Moderate reasoning
- • Fewer enterprise tools
Claude 4
Strengths
- • Very long context
- • High-quality synthesis
- • Safety-focused outputs
- • Advanced reasoning
Considerations
- • High cost
- • Limited third-party integrations
- • Closed-source
- • Alpha bugs
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is better: StableLM 3B or Claude 4?
Claude 4 offers superior overall performance with higher benchmark scores across MMLU, coding, and reasoning tests. The best choice depends on your specific use case requirements and performance priorities.
What are the key differences?
Claude 4 leads in overall performance with higher benchmark scores, while StableLM 3B may offer advantages in specific areas like context window size or specialized capabilities. Both models have their strengths depending on your particular needs.
Which is better for coding?
Claude 4 leads in coding performance with a score of 88%, making it 16.0 percentage points better than StableLM 3B. This makes Claude 4 the superior choice for software development, code generation, and debugging tasks.
Can I use both models together?
Yes! Many organizations use multiple models strategically: one model for routine tasks where efficiency matters, and another for complex, mission-critical applications requiring maximum accuracy. This hybrid approach optimizes both performance and resource utilization across different use cases.
How often are these benchmarks updated?
We update all benchmark scores and pricing data daily to reflect the latest model versions and API pricing changes. Benchmark scores are sourced from official documentation, independent testing platforms like Artificial Analysis, and peer-reviewed academic evaluations. Last updated: 2/2/2026.
Related Comparisons
Ready to Get Started?
Choose the AI model that best fits your needs and budget
Or compare other models to find your perfect match