PitchHut logo
Benchmark-GPT-5-vs-Claude-4-Sonnet-on-200-Requests
A detailed study comparing GPT-5 and Claude 4 Sonnet across various tasks.
Pitch

This project conducts a comprehensive evaluation of GPT-5 and Claude 4 Sonnet using 200 diverse prompts. By measuring performance across various aspects including accuracy, speed, and reasoning quality, it provides valuable insights into the strengths and weaknesses of these leading large language models.

Description

Benchmarking GPT-5 vs. Claude 4 Sonnet: A Detailed Evaluation Study

This project presents a systematic evaluation of two leading large language models (LLMs): GPT-5 and Claude 4 Sonnet. The comparative study was conducted using 200 diverse prompts that encompass various domains such as reasoning, coding, analysis, knowledge, writing, and safety-critical scenarios, utilizing the Cubent VS Code Extension.

Key Findings

The evaluation highlights crucial insights into the performance of both models:

  • Speed: Claude 4 Sonnet consistently outperforms GPT-5 with a median response time of 5.1 seconds compared to GPT-5's 6.4 seconds.
  • Precision: Sonnet achieves slightly higher factual precision (93.2%) over GPT-5 (91.4%) and exhibits a lower hallucination rate of 6.8% versus GPT-5's 8.1%.
  • Overall Quality: Although GPT-5 shows a higher overall task success rate (86%) compared to Sonnet (84%), it excels particularly in complex multi-step reasoning and code generation/debugging tasks.
  • Safety & Refusals: Sonnet demonstrates better refusal correctness with 96%, while both models maintain robust safety compliance.
  • Domain Performance: Sonnet leads in tasks such as summarization and short-form Q&A, while GPT-5 shows strengths in complex reasoning and data analysis tasks.

Repository Structure

The repository is organized as follows:

gpt5-vs-claude4-eval/
├── README.md                  # This file
├── LICENSE                    # MIT License
├── requirements.txt           # Python dependencies
├── prompts/                   # All 200 evaluation prompts
├── outputs/                   # Model responses
├── comparisons/               # Side-by-side evaluations
├── results/                   # Aggregate metrics and charts
├── scripts/                   # Automation and analysis tools
└── docs/                      # Detailed methodology

Evaluation Domains

The study covers various evaluation domains, including:

  • Reasoning & Math - Tasks focused on logic and mathematical problem-solving.
  • Coding & Debugging - Various programming challenges, including debugging and code review.
  • Data Analysis - Statistical analysis and chart interpretation.
  • Knowledge & Fact-Checking - Verification of factual accuracy and sources.
  • Summarization & Editing - Improvements in text compression and style.
  • Safety & Policy Edge Cases - Tests for harmful content and refusal scenarios.

Metrics Used

The evaluation uses several key performance metrics:

  • Task Success (TS) - A measure of success rates for tasks.
  • Factual Precision (FP) - Proportion of verifiable claims provided by the models.
  • Reasoning Quality (RQ) - Assessed on a scale of 1-5 for logical structure.
  • Helpfulness (H) - User-oriented rating of utility.
  • Conciseness (Cnc) - Efficiency in communication.
  • Hallucination Rate - Percentage of unsupported claims made by the models.
  • Safety/Refusal Correctness - Accuracy in policy compliance.
  • Latency - Response times measured using p50/p90/p95.

The findings from this study contribute valuable insights into the capabilities of GPT-5 and Claude 4 Sonnet, guiding further research and applications in the field of AI.

0 comments

No comments yet.

Sign in to be the first to comment.