Claude Sonnet 4.5vsComposer 2.5
Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Composer 2.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Benchmarks | ||
Nonsense detection BullshitBench v2Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 79% | — |
Agentic coding SWE-Bench ProCan the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | — | 54% |
Coding SWE-Bench VerifiedReal coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | 77.2% | — |
Multilingual coding SWE-Bench MultilingualLike SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | — | 79.8% |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.2Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor, on the refreshed v3.2 task set. Scores aren't comparable with v3.1. Higher is better. | — | 56.1% |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.1Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor. Higher is better. | — | 63.2% |
Agentic coding DeepSWE 1.0Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. Higher is better. | — | 18% |
Next.js coding Next.js EvalsVercel's open eval of how well AI coding agents build and migrate real Next.js apps — measured as the share of tasks the agent completes successfully. Higher is better. | 50% | 92%Best |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.1Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | — | 73% |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.0Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 69.3% |
Science GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 83.4% | — |
Multimodal MMMUTests the AI on understanding images and text together across many college subjects. Higher is better. | 68% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Anthropic | SpaceXAI |
| Release date | Sep 29 2025 | May 18 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Proprietary |
Which is better: Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Composer 2.5?
Composer 2.5 leads Claude Sonnet 4.5 on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (Next.js Evals). Claude Sonnet 4.5 shipped 231 days before Composer 2.5, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On Next.js Evals, Composer 2.5 leads at 92% vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 at 50%.
Frequently asked questions
Claude Sonnet 4.5 was released by Anthropic on Sep 29 2025.
Composer 2.5 was released by SpaceXAI on May 18 2026.
Composer 2.5 leads on Next.js Evals — Claude Sonnet 4.5 50% vs Composer 2.5 92%.
Other comparisons
Claude Sonnet 4.5vsGPT-5.6-CyberComposer 2.5vsGPT-5.6-CyberClaude Sonnet 4.5vsGemini 3.7 FlashComposer 2.5vsGemini 3.7 FlashClaude Sonnet 4.5vsMuse GlimmerComposer 2.5vsMuse GlimmerClaude Sonnet 4.5vsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Composer 2.5vsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Claude Sonnet 4.5vsMistral Medium 3.5Composer 2.5vsMistral Medium 3.5Claude Sonnet 4.5vsKimi K3Composer 2.5vsKimi K3