Audi RS 3 vs Mercedes-Benz CLS 63 AMG

Audi RS 3

Sedan · Gasoline · AWD

Mercedes-Benz CLS 63 AMG

Sedan · Gasoline · FWD

Car A

Audi RS 3

The Audi RS 3 pairs very high performance (0–100 km/h in 3.8 s, 290 km/h) with all-wheel-drive traction in a five-seat compact. It’s good value in its segment for speed-focused buyers who still need year-round usability, but efficiency and cargo space are clear trade-offs.

5 seatsSedanGasoline5-star safety10.5 L/100kmAWD

Car B

Mercedes-Benz CLS 63 AMG

The Mercedes-Benz CLS 63 AMG blends supercar-level acceleration with a refined five-seat cabin, making it a strong luxury choice for fast, long-distance travel. Its high price and thirstier V8 suit buyers prioritizing speed and comfort over efficiency.

5 seatsSedanGasoline5-star safety557 hp

Why compared same body typesame powertrainsame ranking profilesame seatsstrong ranking match

Usage fit

Family 55 / 54

City 41 / 20

Budget / value 47 / 11

Road trip 52 / 63

Performance 44 / 46

Cargo 15 / 29

Practical 34 / 27

Premium 56 / 78

Winter 66 / 30

Scores out of 100. Blue = Audi RS 3 · Orange = Mercedes-Benz CLS 63 AMG

Specs side-by-side

Spec Audi RS 3 Mercedes-Benz CLS 63 AMG

Values are representative — confirm for your market and trim.

Pros & cons

Audi RS 3

Serious pace: 400 hp, 480 Nm, 0–100 km/h in 3.8 s.
AWD traction supports confident winter and wet-weather driving.
Seats five, making it viable as a family compact.
Good value in its segment for the performance on offer.
Small trunk (282 L) limits cargo for trips or strollers.
Combined consumption of 10.5 L/100 km is thirsty for daily commuting.
Higher price than non-performance compacts.
No hybrid or EV option for improved efficiency.

Mercedes-Benz CLS 63 AMG

Explosive 0–100 km/h in 3.6 s for effortless overtakes
300 km/h top speed places it among the quickest in its class
Spacious 520-liter trunk and five seats suit road trips and growing families
V8 BiTurbo punch with 557 hp and 700 Nm for confident cruising
High price of 109,900 if outright performance isn’t a priority
Combined consumption of 11.4 signals higher running costs
Less convenient for dense city driving and frequent short hops
Performance focus won’t suit buyers seeking maximum efficiency

Verdict

Pick Audi RS 3 if…

Best fuel economy

Audi RS 3 uses 10.5 L/100km vs 11.4 — a meaningful saving if you cover high mileage.

Pick Mercedes-Benz CLS 63 AMG if…

More power

Mercedes-Benz CLS 63 AMG puts out 557 hp vs 400 — meaningfully quicker and more confident on motorways.

Usage fit

Specs side-by-side

Pros & cons

Audi RS 3

Mercedes-Benz CLS 63 AMG

Verdict

Related comparisons