Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. Claude 3.7 SonnetvsHy3
Updated Jul 2026

Claude 3.7 SonnetvsHy3

Hy3 is cheaper than Claude 3.7 Sonnet at $0.132/M vs $3/M input tokens.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Hy3 compared across 14 shared prompts
SpecClaude 3.7 SonnetHy3
Input price$3/M tokens$0.132/M tokens
Output price$15/M tokens$0.528/M tokens
Context window200K tokens262K tokens
ParametersNot disclosed295B
Weights—Open
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedFeb 2025Jul 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 14 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Historical Counterfactual Analysis

If the transistor had been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, trace the likely technological, economic, and geopolitical implications through…

Claude 3.7 Sonnet760 words
The Transistor in 1920: An Alternative Technological History Immediate Technical Impact (1920-1939) Had the transistor been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, its initial development would have occurred during a very different technological context: Early Adoption: Radio technology, still in its infancy, would rapidly…
Read the full answer
Hy3921 words
Premise: A functional solid-state transistor (germanium point-contact or junction) is demonstrated in 1920, with steady refinement through the interwar years. Vacuum tubes are not immediately displaced, but by the early 1930s transistors are reliable enough for niche military and telecom use, and by the late 1930s they…
Read the full answer

Ethical Dilemma with Stakeholders

You're the CEO of a pharmaceutical company. Your best-selling drug ($2B annual revenue, used by 4 million patients for chronic pain) has…

Claude 3.7 Sonnet694 words
48-Hour Action Plan: Pharmaceutical Safety Crisis Hour 1-2: Initial Assessment and Command Center Immediately establish a crisis management command center with key executives (Chief Medical Officer, Chief Legal Officer, Chief Communications Officer, Chief Regulatory Officer) Review the complete internal research…
Read the full answer
Hy3997 words
Assumptions / Starting Point Current time: Monday 9:00 AM. Board meeting: Wednesday 9:00 AM (Hour 48). Earnings call: Thursday 9:00 AM (Hour 72). Drug: $2B revenue, 4M patients, liver failure 1/8,000 over 5 yrs (~500 total, ~100/yr).
Read the full answer

Mini LBO Underwrite

You are underwriting a 5-year LBO for a private equity investment committee. Company (fictional): HarborTech Services (HTS) –…

Claude 3.7 Sonnet180 words
HarborTech Services LBO Analysis Financial Projections FY2026-FY2030 Entry Assumptions FY2025 Revenue: $900M FY2025 EBITDA: $120M (13.3% margin) Purchase Price: $1,440M (12.0x EBITDA) Transaction Fees: $28.8M (2.0% of EV) Total Investment: $1,468.8M Capital Structure Term Loan: $480M (4.0x EBITDA) Mezzanine: $180M…
Read the full answer
Hy3354 words
1) Simplified LBO Model (FY2026–FY2030, $m) Entry (end FY25): EBITDA $120m, EV = 12.0x = $1,440m. Fees 2% = $28.8m. Debt: TL $480m (9% cash, 1% amort), Mezz $180m (12% cash + 2% PIK). Equity = 1,440+28.8–660 = $808.8m. FY Revenue EBITDA TL Int Mezz Int Cash Tax* Capex ΔNWC FCF after req. svc (opt.
Read the full answer

Startup Pitch Teardown

Here's a pitch deck summary for a startup called "MindMeld AI": **Slide 1 - Vision:** "We're building the future of human-AI collaboration.…

Claude 3.7 Sonnet415 words
Analysis of MindMeld AI's Weakest Pitch Claims Weakest Claim #1: "Our proprietary EEG headband uses advanced ML to decode neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy." Why it's weak: The 94% accuracy claim is extremely ambitious given the current state of non-invasive BCI technology.
Read the full answer
Hy3559 words
Below are the three weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch, why they fail under scrutiny, and how to fix them with concrete, defensible improvements. Slide 3 – “94% accuracy” and “works with any language, any device” Why it’s weak: Technical implausibility: State-of-the-art non-invasive EEG decoding for…
Read the full answer

Advanced Longevity Plan (Biohacker)

Develop a comprehensive, cutting-edge 3-month longevity plan for a biohacker aiming to optimize longevity, physical and cognitive…

Claude 3.7 Sonnet1,348 words
Advanced 3-Month Biohacking Longevity Protocol Overview This comprehensive longevity optimization protocol integrates cutting-edge interventions across multiple domains to enhance healthspan, cognitive performance, and physical vitality.
Read the full answer
Hy3498 words
The 90-Day Biohacker Longevity & Performance Protocol Goal: Maximize healthspan, cognitive resilience, and physical capacity via quantified self, metabolic flexibility, and targeted compounds. Assumptions: Healthy adult, experienced with fasting/exercise, access to wearables & supplements. I.
Read the full answer

Debug This Architecture

Here's the architecture for a real-time collaborative document editor (like Google Docs): **System Overview:** - Frontend: React SPA with…

Claude 3.7 Sonnet472 words
Architectural Analysis: Collaborative Document Editor Failure Modes & Race Conditions WebSocket Connection Failures Issue: If a WebSocket connection drops, changes may be lost until reconnection. Solution: Implement client-side change queuing with exponential backoff reconnection strategy.
Read the full answer
Hy3975 words
Below is a breakdown of the major failure modes, race conditions, and scaling bottlenecks in the described architecture, followed by targeted fixes and their trade-offs.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Hy3
Hy3
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Claude 3.7 SonnetRunner-up

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, Hy3 has the edge: bigger model tier, newer.

Hy3 costs 28x less per token.

Too close to call
API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Input
$3.00
Output
$15.00
Hy3
Input
$0.13
23× cheaper
Output
$0.53
28× cheaper

Hy3 is cheaper on both: 23× input, 28× output.

Where to run it

6 hosts, cheapest first

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

No hosts listed on OpenRouter.

Hy36 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
DDeepInfrafp4$0.13 in·$0.53 out·262k·99.7% upTencentfp8$0.13 in·$0.53 out·262k·99.9% upGGMI Cloudbf16$0.14 in·$0.58 out·262k·98.6% upNNovita$0.14 in·$0.58 out·262k·100% upPPhala$0.15 in·$0.64 out·262k·100% upAAtlasCloudfp8$0.20 in·$0.80 out·262k·99.9% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 23 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Claude 3.7 Sonnet is developed by Anthropic while Hy3 is developed by Tencent. Claude 3.7 Sonnet has a 200K token context window vs Hy3's 262K. You can compare their actual outputs across 14 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Hy3 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 14 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet costs $3/M input tokens and Hy3 costs $0.132/M input tokens. Hy3 is $2.87/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Hy3 across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

Claude 3.7 Sonnet logoDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp logo
Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpLanded Sep 2026
Hy3 logoSolar Pro 4 logo
Hy3 vs Solar Pro 4Landed Sep 2026
Claude 3.7 Sonnet logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Qwen3.7 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Hy3 logoLing 3.0 Flash logo
Hy3 vs Ling 3.0 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Claude 3.7 Sonnet logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Muse Glimmer 30BLanded Sep 2026
Hy3 logoGLM 5.3 logo
Hy3 vs GLM 5.3Landed Sep 2026
Claude 3.7 Sonnet logoTernary Bonsai 2 27B logo
Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27BLanded Sep 2026
Hy3 logoGLM 5.3 Flash logo
Hy3 vs GLM 5.3 FlashLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Claude 3.7 Sonnet logoClaude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet logo
Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Claude 3.7 Thinking SonnetVersion compare
Claude 3.7 Sonnet logoClaude Opus 4.6 logo
Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Claude Opus 4.6Version compare
Hy3 logoHy4 Preview logo
Hy3 vs Hy4 PreviewSame lab
Hy3 logoClaude Opus 4.6 logo
Hy3 vs Claude Opus 4.6Same size
Hy3 logoERNIE 4.5 300B A47B logo
Hy3 vs ERNIE 4.5 300B A47BSame size
Hy3 logoOpenRouter Fusion · Budget (Jun 2026) logo
Hy3 vs OpenRouter Fusion · Budget (Jun 2026)Same size
Hy3 logoOpenRouter Fusion · Quality (Jun 2026) logo
Hy3 vs OpenRouter Fusion · Quality (Jun 2026)Same size
Hy3 logoGemini 1.5 Pro logo
Hy3 vs Gemini 1.5 ProNew provider

Model pages

Claude 3.7 Sonnet logo
Claude 3.7 Sonnet60 outputs, specs and price
Hy3 logo
Hy314 outputs, specs and price
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed