Claude 3 Haiku vs Claude Haiku 4.5
Compare Claude 3 Haiku and Claude Haiku 4.5 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Open Prompt, OCR, Image Captioning, Object Detection, and Classification.
Compare Claude 3 Haiku vs Claude Haiku 4.5 live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Claude 3 Haiku is deprecated and can no longer be run. Details and evals are still available on its model page.
Models in this comparison
Claude 3 Haiku vs Claude Haiku 4.5: Overview
Claude 3 Haiku is a large language model developed by Anthropic and released in March 2024 as part of the Claude 3 family, alongside Claude 3 Sonnet and Claude 3 Opus. It is designed to be the fastest and most cost-efficient model in the series, optimized for high-throughput applications.
Like the other Claude 3 models, Haiku is multimodal, able to process both text and image inputs while generating text outputs. It supports a context window of up to 200,000 tokens, with Anthropic noting that the Claude 3 models are technically capable of handling inputs exceeding one million tokens in special cases.
Haiku is positioned as a model well-suited for scenarios that demand speed and scalability at lower cost, such as customer support, summarization, and other tasks where rapid responses are prioritized. Compared to the larger Claude 3 Sonnet and Opus, Haiku provides lower latency and higher efficiency, while the larger models offer stronger reasoning and depth of analysis.
Claude Haiku 4.5 is Anthropic’s lightweight model in the Claude 4.5 series, released in October 2025 under a proprietary license. Designed for speed and cost efficiency, it delivers near-frontier performance while maintaining Anthropic’s AI Safety Level 2 standard. Haiku 4.5 supports both text and multimodal (text and image) inputs, integrates tool use and extended reasoning, and features a 200,000 token context window, making it adept at handling long or complex workflows. Though the parameter count remains undisclosed, it achieves about 73.3% on SWE-bench Verified, reflecting strong coding and reasoning ability. Haiku 4.5 is ideal for developers and researchers seeking rapid, cost-effective model calls for analysis, coding, or multimodal understanding.
Claude 3 Haiku vs Claude Haiku 4.5 Comparison Table
| Property | Claude 3 Haiku | Claude Haiku 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Anthropic | Anthropic |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Mar 2024 | Oct 2025 |
| Context Window | 200K | 200K |
| Parameters | ||
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $1.00 | |
| Output $/1M | $5.00 | |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | |
| Classification | Demo | |
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| OCR | Demo | |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts Score key:≥75%40–74%<40% | ||
| Visual Understanding | ||
| Overall Score | 58.21% | |
| Avg Response Time | 3.15s | |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 2.2K | |
| Median output tokens | 174 | |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0030 | |
| Defect Detection | 80%(12/15) | |
| Document Understanding | 77.8%(7/9) | |
| Object Counting | 0%(0/10) | |
| Object Understanding | 71.4%(10/14) | |
| Spatial Understanding | 52.6%(10/19) | |
| OCR | ||
| Overall Score | 61.57% | |
| Avg Response Time | 2.13s | |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 735 | |
| Median output tokens | 101 | |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0012 | |
| Focused Scene OCR | 61.6%(61/99) | |
| Handwritten Math | 20%(2/10) | |
| License Plate Recognition | 66.7%(20/30) | |
| Text Recognition | 63.3%(19/30) | |
| VQA & Extraction | 65%(39/60) | |
Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology