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. Hy3vsSonar Pro Search
Updated Jul 2026

Hy3vsSonar Pro Search

Hy3 is cheaper than Sonar Pro Search at $0.132/M vs $3/M input tokens.

Hy3 and Sonar Pro Search compared across 14 shared prompts
SpecHy3Sonar Pro Search
Input price$0.132/M tokens$3/M tokens
Output price$0.528/M tokens$15/M tokens
Context window262K tokens200K tokens
WeightsOpenClosed
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedJul 2026Oct 2025
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

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

Simple 7-Ingredient Recipe

Create a simple recipe for a delicious dish (sweet or savory) using only 7 common pantry ingredients. Include a creative name for the dish…

Hy3178 words
Dish Name: Ruby Hurricane Pasta Ingredients (exactly 7 common pantry staples): Spaghetti (or any dry pasta) Canned diced tomatoes Garlic (pre-minced or whole cloves) Extra-virgin olive oil Red pepper flakes Salt Grated Parmesan (shelf-stable style) (Water for boiling pasta is assumed free and not counted.)
Read the full answer
Sonar Pro Search219 words
Golden Maple Crunch Oatmeal A warm, comforting, and slightly sweet breakfast (or dessert) that’s ready in minutes—using just seven pantry staples. Ingredients Rolled oats (not instant) Water or milk (dairy or plant-based) Maple syrup Butter Salt Cinnamon Walnuts (or any nuts you have) Instructions Toast the Oats: In a…
Read the full answer

Historical Counterfactual Analysis

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

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
Sonar Pro Search412 words
Technological Implications An earlier transistor invention in 1920 would accelerate electronics from vacuum tubes to solid-state devices by the 1930s, enabling smaller, reliable amplifiers and switches decades ahead of 1947.[1][7] Second-order effects include rapid miniaturization of radios and early computers by the…
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…

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
Sonar Pro Search778 words
Immediate Priorities Prioritize patient safety by initiating monitoring and reporting preparations, while assessing full data to inform board and regulators. Ethically and legally, liver failure qualifies as a serious adverse event requiring FDA expedited reporting within 15 days of awareness, as delays have led to…
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.…

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
Sonar Pro Search368 words
The three weakest claims are the 94% text decoding accuracy, the $5.3B BCI market projection by 2030, and the $180B TAM from 3.5 billion smartphone users. 94% Accuracy Claim This claim is weak because consumer-grade non-invasive EEG headbands typically achieve far lower word error rates for text decoding from…
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…

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
Sonar Pro Search348 words
This 3-month biohacking plan optimizes longevity, physical performance, and cognitive function through evidence-based protocols, progressing from foundational habits (Month 1) to advanced integration (Month 3).
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…

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
Sonar Pro Search637 words
Race Conditions Client Clock Skew in Conflict Resolution Client-generated timestamps for last-write-wins can fail due to clock skew across devices, where one client's clock lags or leads, causing incorrect overwrite ordering even if changes were logically sequential.[21][27][32] This leads to lost edits…
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Hy3
Hy3
Sonar Pro Search
Sonar Pro SearchRunner-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

Hy3
Input
$0.13
23× cheaper
Output
$0.53
28× cheaper
Sonar Pro Search
Input
$3.00
Output
$15.00

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

Where to run it

7 hosts, cheapest first

Hy36 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
Tencentfp8$0.08 in·$0.33 out·262k·99.9% upDDeepInfrafp4$0.13 in·$0.53 out·262k·99.6% upGGMI Cloudbf16$0.14 in·$0.58 out·262k·98.6% upNNovita$0.14 in·$0.58 out·262k·99.7% upPPhala$0.15 in·$0.64 out·262k·99.9% upAAtlasCloudfp8$0.20 in·$0.80 out·262k·99.9% up
Sonar Pro Search1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Perplexity$3.00 in·$15.00 out·200k·100% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 22 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

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

It depends on your use case. Hy3 and Sonar Pro Search 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.

Hy3 costs $0.132/M input tokens and Sonar Pro Search costs $3/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 Hy3 and Sonar Pro Search 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

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

Same lab, same size, long tail

Hy3 logoHy4 Preview logo
Hy3 vs Hy4 PreviewSame lab
Hy3 logoClaude Opus 4.6 logo
Hy3 vs Claude Opus 4.6Same size
Sonar Pro Search logoOx Alpha logo
Sonar Pro Search vs Ox AlphaSame size
Sonar Pro Search logoMiniMax M3 logo
Sonar Pro Search vs MiniMax M3Same size
Hy3 logoMiniMax M2.1 logo
Hy3 vs MiniMax M2.1New provider
Hy3 logoMiniMax M2.5 logo
Hy3 vs MiniMax M2.5New provider
Hy3 logoMiniMax M2.7 logo
Hy3 vs MiniMax M2.7New provider
Hy3 logoMiniMax M3 logo
Hy3 vs MiniMax M3New provider

Model pages

Hy3 logo
Hy314 outputs, specs and price
Sonar Pro Search logo
Sonar Pro Search53 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