Roboflow

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro

Compare Claude Haiku 5.5 and Gemini 2.5 Pro side-by-side.

Compare Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

These models don't share enough common tasks for a side-by-side demo. See the comparison table below for their capabilities.

Models in this comparison

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro on Vision Evals

Claude Haiku 5.5 scores higher on 5 of the six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Object Detection, where Claude Haiku 5.5 leads 65.8% to 33.7%.

Overall, Claude Haiku 5.5 averages 77.2% (#20 of 61) against 66.0% (#42 of 61) for Gemini 2.5 Pro.

Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper ($0.0005 vs $0.0050 per sample), while Gemini 2.5 Pro is faster (6.1s vs 13.2s per sample).

Claude Haiku 5.5Gemini 2.5 Pro

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro Comparison Table

Evals updated October 8, 2026Pricing updated October 8, 2026

PropertyClaude Haiku 5.5Gemini 2.5 Pro
OrganizationAnthropicGoogle
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateOct 2026Jun 2025
Context Window1.0M1.0M
ParametersundisclosedUnknown
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.100$1.25
Output $/1M$0.500$10.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningSupportedDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationSupportedDemo
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionSupportedDemo
OCRSupportedDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringSupportedDemo
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
77.2%
66.0%
Avg cost / sample$0.0005$0.0050
Avg speed / sample13.23s6.11s
By task
Object Detection (low)
65.8%
±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.1 to 66.2
$0.0006
33.7%
$0.010
Object Detection (high)
68.2%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.2 to 69.2
$0.0010
–
Counting (low)
68.9%
±4.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 64.9 to 74.3
$0.0003
52.7%
$0.0012
Counting (high)
73.0%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 74.3
$0.0004
–
Identification (low)
83.3%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5
$0.0002
93.8%
$0.0012
Identification (high)
86.5%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 87.5
$0.0003
–
OCR (low)
90.1%
±1.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.8 to 91.0
$0.0006
88.8%
$0.0047
OCR (high)
88.0%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.0 to 89.6
$0.0009
–
Data Extraction (low)
85.9%
±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.5 to 87.6
$0.0002
84.5%
$0.0013
Data Extraction (high)
87.3%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 86.6 to 87.6
$0.0002
–
Reasoning (low)
68.9%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 66.9 to 70.9
$0.0004
42.4%
$0.0013
Reasoning (high)
74.8%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 72.2 to 77.5
$0.0006
62.3%
$0.011

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro: Overview

Claude Haiku 5.5

Claude Haiku 5.5 is a proprietary multimodal language model from Anthropic and the smallest member of the Claude 5.5 family, released on October 7, 2026 after Claude Opus 5.5 and Claude Sonnet 5.5. It accepts text and image input and returns text, with a 1M token context window and up to 128K output tokens per request. It is the first Haiku-class model with an adjustable effort parameter: adaptive thinking is on by default and the model decides how much to reason, steered by effort levels from low to max with medium as the default. Its training data cutoff is June 2026. Pricing starts at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens for prompts up to 100K tokens, which Anthropic reports is about 90% lower than Claude Haiku 4.5 for requests in that range.

Anthropic positions Haiku 5.5 for high-volume, latency-sensitive work such as classification, extraction, routing, summarization, and subagent tasks, and describes it as its fastest model to date at standard speed. On visual and agentic evaluations reported at launch, it scores 46.4% on Chartography, a chart reading benchmark, compared with 6.4% for Haiku 4.5 and 61.6% for Sonnet 5.5, and 72.4% on the offline subset of OSWorld 2.1, a screenshot driven computer use benchmark, compared with 15.7% for Haiku 4.5. It uses the same tokenizer as Claude Opus 4.7 and later models, so the same text counts as roughly 30% more tokens than on Haiku 4.5.

Gemini 2.5 Pro

Gemini 2.5 Pro, released on June 17, 2025, is Google DeepMind’s most capable model in the Gemini 2.5 family, optimized for deep reasoning, coding, and complex multimodal tasks. It accepts text, images, audio, video, and PDFs as input and outputs text. The model supports 1 million input tokens with an output capacity of up to 65K tokens, enabling large-scale comprehension of datasets, codebases, and technical documents. Its training knowledge extends to January 2025.

Pro outperforms earlier Gemini 2.0 models across benchmarks, including agentic coding tasks where it achieved ~63.8% on SWE-Bench Verified. It supports structured outputs, function calling, code execution, search grounding, and URL context, making it well-suited for enterprise, STEM, and developer workflows. However, it does not currently support image or audio generation in its stable release, and its higher computational cost and latency make it less efficient than Flash or Flash-Lite. It is available via the Gemini API, Google AI Studio, and Vertex AI.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Claude Haiku 5.5 performed better. It scores higher on 5 of the six vision tasks and averages 77.2% (#20 of 61) against 66.0% (#42 of 61) for Gemini 2.5 Pro. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, Claude Haiku 5.5 leads with 65.8% against 33.7%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0005 per sample against $0.0050. Claude Haiku 5.5 is priced at $0.10 per 1M input tokens and $0.50 per 1M output; Gemini 2.5 Pro is priced at $1.25 per 1M input tokens and $10.00 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Gemini 2.5 Pro is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 6.1s per inference against 13.2s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.