Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Llama 3 Instruct 70B
Wins 5 of 5 areas
Coding · Reasoning · Facts · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 0 of 5 areas
—
Claude Haiku 4.5 is the stronger all-rounder.Llama 3 Instruct 70B is cheaper.
Scores updated · 20 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the five areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking20Claude Haiku 4.52 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- CodingWriting and fixing software20Claude Haiku 4.52 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up10Claude Haiku 4.51 of 2 tests · 1 tie
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Claude Haiku 4.51 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10Claude Haiku 4.51 of 1 test
Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Llama 3 Instruct 70B costs 43% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude Haiku 4.5 pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+60.2points ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+29.3points ahead
- Hard command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench Hard+26.5points ahead
Where Llama 3 Instruct 70B pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 20 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Haiku 4.5
- Terminal-Bench HardClaude Haiku 4.5 by 26.527.30.8+26.5
- SciCodeClaude Haiku 4.5 by 23.342.218.9+23.3
ReasoningClaude Haiku 4.5
- GPQA DiamondClaude Haiku 4.5 by 29.367.237.9+29.3
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Haiku 4.5 by 5.910.44.5+5.9
- CritPttie00tie
FactsClaude Haiku 4.5
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Haiku 4.5 by 60.272.712.5+60.2
- AA-Omniscience · Accuracytie1817.7tie
Following instructionsClaude Haiku 4.5
- IFBenchClaude Haiku 4.5 by 17.254.337.1+17.2
Other results11 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Claude Haiku 4.5 by 54.754.70+54.7
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Haiku 4.5 by 49.9-4.4-54.3+49.9
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Haiku 4.5 by 37.143.96.8+37.1
- HarmBenchClaude Haiku 4.5 by 31.995.964+31.9
- AIR-Bench 2024Claude Haiku 4.5 by 28.693.264.6+28.6
- AA IntelligenceClaude Haiku 4.5 by 11.416.95.5+11.4
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Haiku 4.5 by 10.310.30+10.3
- XSTestLlama 3 Instruct 70B by 3.693.296.8+3.6
- bbqClaude Haiku 4.5 by 1.892.891+1.8
- anthropic_red_teamtie96.996.7tie
- simple_safety_teststie98.899tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Llama 3 Instruct 70B?
Claude Haiku 4.5 wins all five areas where both have results: coding, reasoning, facts, long documents and following instructions. Llama 3 Instruct 70B wins none, but costs 43% less.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Haiku 4.5. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Llama 3 Instruct 70B wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Haiku 4.5 costs $1.00 per million input tokens and $5.00 per million output tokens; Llama 3 Instruct 70B costs $0.65 and $2.75. That makes Llama 3 Instruct 70B about 43% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 20 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 9 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 11 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.