Model Comparison

Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Llama 3.1 8B InstructWhich is better in 2026?

Claude 3.5 Haiku significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is 53.3x cheaper per token.

Verdict: Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Llama 3.1 8B Instruct — which is better?

Claude 3.5 Haiku (by Anthropic) and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct (by Meta) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

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.

On price, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is roughly 53.3x 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.

Choose Claude 3.5 Haiku if…

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 4 of 4 shared benchmarks
  • 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 if…

  • cost matters — it's about 53.3x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

4 benchmarks

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.

Thu Jul 30 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

For input processing, Claude 3.5 Haiku ($0.80/1M tokens) is 26.7x more expensive than Llama 3.1 8B Instruct ($0.03/1M 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

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Jul 30 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input tokens$0.80
Output tokens$4.00
Best providerAWS Bedrock
Meta
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Input tokens$0.03
Output tokens$0.03
Best providerLambda
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

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.

Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Meta
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Thu Jul 30 2026 • llm-stats.com

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.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Proprietary

Closed source

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct

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.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Oct 22, 2024

1.8 years ago

3mo newer
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct

Jul 23, 2024

2.0 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.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

—

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct

Dec 2023

Provider Availability

Claude 3.5 Haiku is available from Bedrock, Google, Anthropic. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is available from Lambda, DeepInfra, Groq, Sambanova, Cerebras, Hyperbolic, Together, Fireworks, Bedrock.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $0.80/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.00/1M
google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $0.80/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.00/1M
anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $1.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $5.00/1M

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct

lambda logo
Lambda
Input Price:Input: $0.03/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.03/1M
deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.05/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.05/1M
groq logo
Groq
Input Price:Input: $0.05/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.08/1M
sambanova logo
Sambanova
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.20/1M
cerebras logo
Cerebras
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.10/1M
hyperbolic logo
Hyperbolic
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.10/1M
together logo
Together
Input Price:Input: $0.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.20/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.20/1M
bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $0.22/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.22/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Higher DROP score (83.1% vs 59.5%)
Higher GPQA score (41.6% vs 30.4%)
Higher HumanEval score (88.1% vs 72.6%)
Higher MMLU-Pro score (65.0% vs 48.3%)
Meta
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights

Detailed Comparison

Interactive Arena

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.

Claude 3.5 Haiku
✓ Preferred
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Open in Playground
AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Meta
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Llama 3.1 8B Instruct.

Which is better, Claude 3.5 Haiku or Llama 3.1 8B Instruct?

Claude 3.5 Haiku significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude 3.5 Haiku is made by Anthropic and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is made by Meta. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Claude 3.5 Haiku compare to Llama 3.1 8B Instruct in benchmarks?

Claude 3.5 Haiku scores HumanEval: 88.1%, MGSM: 85.6%, DROP: 83.1%, MATH: 69.4%, MMLU-Pro: 65.0%. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct scores GSM-8K (CoT): 84.5%, ARC-C: 83.4%, API-Bank: 82.6%, IFEval: 80.4%, BFCL: 76.1%.

Is Claude 3.5 Haiku cheaper than Llama 3.1 8B Instruct?

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is 26.7x cheaper for input tokens. Claude 3.5 Haiku costs $0.80/M input and $4.00/M output via bedrock. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs $0.03/M input and $0.03/M output via lambda.

What are the context window sizes for Claude 3.5 Haiku and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct?

Claude 3.5 Haiku supports 200K tokens and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct supports 131K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude 3.5 Haiku and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct?

Key differences include context window (200K vs 131K), input pricing ($0.80 vs $0.03/M), licensing (Proprietary vs Llama 3.1 Community License). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude 3.5 Haiku and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct?

Claude 3.5 Haiku is developed by Anthropic and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons