Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Llama 4
Pricing, benchmarks, and use case comparison
Quick take
- •Claude Haiku 4.5 is meaningfully stronger at speed (98 vs 72 on our capability index).
- •Llama 4 is meaningfully stronger at long context (95 vs 70).
- •Llama 4 is open-weights (free to self-host); Claude Haiku 4.5 is paid API only.
- •Llama 4 has a Up to 10M tokens (Scout); ~1M tokens (Maverick) context window vs 200K - better for whole-repo or long-document work.
Specs comparison
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | Llama 4 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Meta |
| Type | Closed source | Open source |
| Context window | 200K | ✓Up to 10M tokens (Scout); ~1M tokens (Maverick) |
| Input / 1M tokens | $1.00 | ✓Free (self-host) |
| Output / 1M tokens | $5.00 | Free (self-host) |
| Release date | 2025-10 | 2025-04 |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Llama 4 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3% | - |
| GPQA | 64.6% | - |
| MMLU Pro | 80.0% | - |
| Scout context window | - | 10M tokens |
| Scout size | - | 17B active / 109B total (16 experts) |
| Maverick size | - | 17B active / 400B total (128 experts) |
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 Llama 4 if...
- →You need extremely long context in an open model (Scout's 10M window)
- →Self-hosted or on-prem multimodal deployment
- →You want an efficient MoE that activates few parameters per token
- →Fine-tuning or full control over the model