Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 17, 2026

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Llama 3.1 405B benchmark

Name: Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Llama 3.1 405B AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares Claude Haiku 4.5 (Anthropic) and Llama 3.1 405B (Meta) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 17, 2026. On preference Elo, Claude Haiku 4.5 is ahead by 68 points (1,438 vs 1,370; lmarena (Aug 16, 2026)). On SWE-bench coding, Llama 3.1 405B resolves 58.4% versus 58.2% (swebench (Aug 17, 2026)). Claude Haiku 4.5 streams faster (175 tok/s) while Llama 3.1 405B is the cheaper output token ($3.5/1M). Claude Haiku 4.5 has the larger context window (200k tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Share Analysis:

WhatsApp Telegram X / Post LinkedIn Reddit

Anthropic

Claude Haiku 4.5

Anthropic cheap/fast Claude SKU. Official Claude Platform list price $1/$5 per 1M tokens (Anthropic Haiku page).

Haiku 4.5Elo 1,438$5/1M out

Claude 4 Series Family (5 models)

Compare vs Base (Claude Opus 4.5)

Claude Opus 4.5

Anthropic

Flagship Base

CoT Scaler

Elo

1568

Speed

62 tok/s

Price

$25.00 / 1M

View model →vs this

Claude Opus 4.6

Anthropic

Opus 4.6

CoT Scaler

Elo

1574

Speed

64 tok/s

Price

$25.00 / 1M

+6 Elo0% cost

View model →vs this

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Anthropic

Sonnet 4.5

Elo

1524

Speed

88 tok/s

Price

$15.00 / 1M

-44 Elo-40% cost1.4x speed

View model →vs this

Claude Opus 4.8

Anthropic

Opus 4.8

CoT Scaler

Elo

1598

Speed

66 tok/s

Price

$25.00 / 1M

+30 Elo0% cost1.1x speed

View model →vs this

Claude Haiku 4.5

Anthropic

Haiku 4.5

Elo

1438

Speed

175 tok/s

Price

$5.00 / 1M

-130 Elo-80% cost2.8x speed

Viewing now

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A

Model B

Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude Haiku 4.5 (7)vsLlama 3.1 405B (3)

Claude Haiku 4.5: 7W (70%)Overall: Claude Haiku 4.5Llama 3.1 405B: 3W (30%)

← Claude Haiku 4.5Llama 3.1 405B →

Claude Haiku 4.5 (3/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,438vs1,370

Coding Elo

1,446vs1,385

SWE-bench

58.2%vs58.4%

LiveBench

62.4%vs61.2%

GPQA Diamond

74%vs75.2%

Claude Haiku 4.5: 3WLlama 3.1 405B: 2W

Claude Haiku 4.5 (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

175 tok/svs42 tok/s

Time to first token

95 msvs360 ms

Claude Haiku 4.5: 2WLlama 3.1 405B: 0W

Claude Haiku 4.5 (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$5/1Mvs$3.5/1M

Input price

$1/1Mvs$1.25/1M

Context window

200kvs128k

Claude Haiku 4.5: 2WLlama 3.1 405B: 1W

Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Dimensional AdvantageClaude Haiku 4.5 4/6

Preference Elo

Claude Haiku 4.5

68 pts advantage

Throughput Speed

Claude Haiku 4.5

133 tok/s faster

Token Price Efficiency

Llama 3.1 405B

$1.50/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Elo

High is better

+5%1,438

EloHigh is better

1,370

Code Elo

High is better

+4%1,446

Code EloHigh is better

1,385

LiveBench

High is better

+2%62.4%

LiveBenchHigh is better

61.2%

SWE-bench

High is better

58.2%

SWE-benchHigh is better

58.4%

GPQA

High is better

74%

GPQAHigh is better

75.2%+2%

TTFT

Low is better

+279%95 ms

TTFTLow is better

360 ms

Speed

High is better

+317%175 tok/s

SpeedHigh is better

42 tok/s

In $

Low is better

+25%$1.00 / 1M

In $Low is better

$1.25 / 1M

Out $

Low is better

$5.00 / 1M

Out $Low is better

$3.50 / 1M+43%

Context

High is better

+56%200k

ContextHigh is better

128k

Interactive Simulator (USD)

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).

Save up to 13% with Llama 3.1 405B

Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo

Quick Presets:

Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out

RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)

Claude Haiku 4.5$110.00 / mo

In: $35Out: $75

Llama 3.1 405B$96.25 / mo

In: $43.75Out: $52.5

Estimated Cost Delta

Llama 3.1 405B is estimated to save $13.75/month ($165/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

1
Llama 3.1 405B:Pick Llama 3.1 405B when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
2
Claude Haiku 4.5:Pick Claude Haiku 4.5 when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.
3
Claude Haiku 4.5:Pick Claude Haiku 4.5 as the default general assistant.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsLlama 3.1 405B

Higher SWE-bench (58.4%).

High-volume chatLlama 3.1 405B

Lower output list price ($3.5/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIClaude Haiku 4.5

Lower TTFT (95 ms).

Long-document RAGClaude Haiku 4.5

Larger window (200k).

Screenshots / visionClaude Haiku 4.5

Claude Haiku 4.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Llama 3.1 405B	Higher SWE-bench (58.4%).
High-volume chat	Llama 3.1 405B	Lower output list price ($3.5/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Claude Haiku 4.5	Lower TTFT (95 ms).
Long-document RAG	Claude Haiku 4.5	Larger window (200k).
Screenshots / vision	Claude Haiku 4.5	Claude Haiku 4.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news

compareAug 16, 2026

Haiku 4.5 vs Llama 4 Scout: cheap Claude versus cheap open Llama

$1/$5 hosted Claude vs a cheap long-context open sibling. The alternative-to-Sonnet pair that is honest.

launchApr 8, 2026

Llama 4 Scout: long-context open sibling of Maverick

Huge window, cheap hosted lists. The Haiku alternative that is actually open-weight.

launchOct 22, 2025

Claude Haiku 4.5 at $1/$5: the cheap Claude people actually ship

Official Anthropic list $1/$5. This is the SKU behind “cheapest Claude alternative” that is still Claude.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/claude-haiku-4-5-vs-llama-3-1-405b/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

Anthropic

Claude Haiku 4.5

Elo 1,438

LiveBench62.4%

SWE-bench58.2%

Speed175 tok/s

Output cost$5/1M

Llama 3.1 405B

Elo 1,370

LiveBench61.2%

SWE-bench58.4%

Speed42 tok/s

Output cost$3.5/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Llama 3.1 405B?: Claude Haiku 4.5 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,438). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Llama 3.1 405B?: Llama 3.1 405B leads SWE-bench at 58.4% vs 58.2%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: Llama 3.1 405B output tokens are $3.5/1M versus $5/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Llama 3.1 405B?: Claude Haiku 4.5 has the lower time-to-first-token (95 ms vs 360 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?: Claude Haiku 4.5 accepts 200k tokens versus 128k.
Can I self-host either model?: Llama 3.1 405B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?: No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?: Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude Haiku 4.5 and Llama 3.1 405B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Claude Haiku 4.5 matchups →|All Llama 3.1 405B matchups →

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Claude 3.5 Haiku (previous haiku)Llama 3.1 405B vs Llama 3.1 70B (next llama)Llama 4 Maverick vs Claude Haiku 4.5 Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude Haiku 4.5 Claude Sonnet 5 vs Claude Haiku 4.5 Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Haiku 4.5

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Llama 3.1 405B benchmark

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude Haiku 4.5 (7)vsLlama 3.1 405B (3)

Claude Haiku 4.5: 7W (70%)Overall: Claude Haiku 4.5Llama 3.1 405B: 3W (30%)

← Claude Haiku 4.5Llama 3.1 405B →

Claude Haiku 4.5 (3/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,438vs1,370

Coding Elo

1,446vs1,385

SWE-bench

58.2%vs58.4%

LiveBench

62.4%vs61.2%

GPQA Diamond

74%vs75.2%

Claude Haiku 4.5: 3WLlama 3.1 405B: 2W

Claude Haiku 4.5 (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

175 tok/svs42 tok/s

Time to first token

95 msvs360 ms

Claude Haiku 4.5: 2WLlama 3.1 405B: 0W

Claude Haiku 4.5 (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$5/1Mvs$3.5/1M

Input price

$1/1Mvs$1.25/1M

Context window

200kvs128k

Claude Haiku 4.5: 2WLlama 3.1 405B: 1W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsLlama 3.1 405B

Higher SWE-bench (58.4%).

High-volume chatLlama 3.1 405B

Lower output list price ($3.5/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIClaude Haiku 4.5

Lower TTFT (95 ms).

Long-document RAGClaude Haiku 4.5

Larger window (200k).

Screenshots / visionClaude Haiku 4.5

Claude Haiku 4.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Llama 3.1 405B	Higher SWE-bench (58.4%).
High-volume chat	Llama 3.1 405B	Lower output list price ($3.5/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Claude Haiku 4.5	Lower TTFT (95 ms).
Long-document RAG	Claude Haiku 4.5	Larger window (200k).
Screenshots / vision	Claude Haiku 4.5	Claude Haiku 4.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Llama 3.1 405B?

Claude Haiku 4.5 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,438). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.

Which is better at coding, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Llama 3.1 405B?

Llama 3.1 405B leads SWE-bench at 58.4% vs 58.2%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

Llama 3.1 405B output tokens are $3.5/1M versus $5/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.

Which is faster, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Llama 3.1 405B?

Claude Haiku 4.5 has the lower time-to-first-token (95 ms vs 360 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.

Which has the larger context window?

Claude Haiku 4.5 accepts 200k tokens versus 128k.

Can I self-host either model?

Llama 3.1 405B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.

Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?

No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.

What does preference Elo mean on this page?

Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude Haiku 4.5 and Llama 3.1 405B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Claude 4 Series Family (5 models)

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Claude Haiku 4.5

Claude Haiku 4.5

Llama 3.1 405B

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Haiku 4.5 vs Llama 4 Scout: cheap Claude versus cheap open Llama

Llama 4 Scout: long-context open sibling of Maverick

Claude Haiku 4.5 at $1/$5: the cheap Claude people actually ship

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Claude Haiku 4.5

Llama 3.1 405B

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

Claude 4 Series Family (5 models)

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Claude Haiku 4.5

Claude Haiku 4.5

Llama 3.1 405B

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Haiku 4.5 vs Llama 4 Scout: cheap Claude versus cheap open Llama

Llama 4 Scout: long-context open sibling of Maverick

Claude Haiku 4.5 at $1/$5: the cheap Claude people actually ship

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Claude Haiku 4.5

Llama 3.1 405B

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons