Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Claude 3.5 Haiku leads the LLM Stats Score 5.2 to -2.6. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is 71.1x cheaper per token.
Anthropic · Meta · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Claude 3.5 Haiku leads the overall LLM Stats Score 5.2 to -2.6, ranking #304 overall.
In the 4 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude 3.5 Haiku wins 4; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is roughly 71.1x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Claude 3.5 Haiku also accepts a larger context window (200,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose Claude 3.5 Haiku
- overall performance matters — it scores 5.2 and ranks #304 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 4 of 4 exact shared results
- you process long inputs — it offers a 200,000 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2024
Choose Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
- cost matters — it's about 71.1x cheaper per token
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
9 reported for Claude 3.5 Haiku · 18 for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Claude 3.5 Haiku outperforms in 4 benchmarks (DROP, GPQA, HumanEval, MMLU-Pro), while Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is better at 0 benchmarks.
Claude 3.5 Haiku significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Claude 3.5 Haiku ($0.80/1M tokens) is 40.0x more expensive than Llama 3.1 8B Instruct ($0.02/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude 3.5 Haiku ($4.00/1M tokens) is 133.3x more expensive than Llama 3.1 8B Instruct ($0.03/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Claude 3.5 Haiku is more expensive than Llama 3.1 8B Instruct.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Claude 3.5 Haiku accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to Llama 3.1 8B Instruct's 131,072 tokens. Claude 3.5 Haiku can generate longer responses up to 200,000 tokens, while Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is limited to 131,072 tokens.
License
Usage and distribution terms
Claude 3.5 Haiku is licensed under a proprietary license, while Llama 3.1 8B Instruct uses Llama 3.1 Community License.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Proprietary
Closed source
Llama 3.1 Community License
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Claude 3.5 Haiku was released on 2024-10-22, while Llama 3.1 8B Instruct was released on 2024-07-23.
Claude 3.5 Haiku is 3 months newer than Llama 3.1 8B Instruct.
Oct 22, 2024
1.9 years ago
3mo newerJul 23, 2024
2.2 years ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2023-12-31, while Claude 3.5 Haiku's cutoff date is not specified.
We can confirm Llama 3.1 8B Instruct's training data extends to 2023-12-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without Claude 3.5 Haiku's cutoff date.
—
Dec 2023
Provider Availability
Claude 3.5 Haiku is available from Bedrock, Google, Anthropic. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is available from DeepInfra, Lambda, Groq, Sambanova, Cerebras, Hyperbolic, Together, Fireworks, Bedrock.
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude 3.5 Haiku and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Llama 3.1 8B Instruct.