Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Gemini 3.5
Pricing, benchmarks, and use case comparison
Quick take
- •Claude Haiku 4.5 is meaningfully stronger at cost efficiency (97 vs 85 on our capability index).
- •Gemini 3.5 is meaningfully stronger at long context (90 vs 70).
- •Claude Haiku 4.5 is 33% cheaper on input tokens, which compounds fast on high-volume or agentic workloads.
- •Claude Haiku 4.5 has a 200K context window vs 1,048,576 tokens (Gemini 3.5 Flash; Pro variant not yet released) - better for whole-repo or long-document work.
Specs comparison
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | Gemini 3.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Google DeepMind |
| Type | Closed source | Closed source |
| Context window | ✓200K | 1,048,576 tokens (Gemini 3.5 Flash; Pro variant not yet released) |
| Input / 1M tokens | ✓$1.00 | $1.50 |
| Output / 1M tokens | $5.00 | $9.00 |
| Release date | 2025-10 | 2026-05 |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Gemini 3.5 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3% | - |
| GPQA | 64.6% | - |
| MMLU Pro | 80.0% | - |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (coding) | - | 76.2% |
| MCP Atlas (tool use) | - | 83.6% |
| CharXiv Reasoning (multimodal) | - | 84.2% |
Scores sourced from official provider release posts and independent benchmark aggregators.
Which should you choose?
Choose Claude Haiku 4.5 if...
- →You need high throughput and low latency at minimal cost
- →You are fanning out many parallel sub-agents or worker calls
- →You want solid coding/computer-use quality without Opus/Sonnet pricing
- →Your task fits comfortably within a 200K context window
Choose Gemini 3.5 if...
- →You need frontier agent/coding performance without frontier prices
- →Building autonomous agents that make many tool calls
- →High-throughput production workloads that were previously too costly on a Pro model
- →You want a strong default multimodal model with a 1M-token context window