Model Comparison

Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Phi-3.5-vision-instruct

Comparing Claude 3.5 Haiku and Phi-3.5-vision-instruct across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

Claude 3.5 Haiku and Phi-3.5-vision-instruct don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude 3.5 Haiku specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude 3.5 Haiku specifies output context (200,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-vision-instruct
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Sat May 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Phi-3.5-vision-instruct supports multimodal inputs, whereas Claude 3.5 Haiku does not.

Phi-3.5-vision-instruct can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Phi-3.5-vision-instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3.5 Haiku is licensed under a proprietary license, while Phi-3.5-vision-instruct uses MIT.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Proprietary

Closed source

Phi-3.5-vision-instruct

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.5 Haiku was released on 2024-10-22, while Phi-3.5-vision-instruct was released on 2024-08-23.

Claude 3.5 Haiku is 2 months newer than Phi-3.5-vision-instruct.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Oct 22, 2024

1.6 years ago

2mo newer
Phi-3.5-vision-instruct

Aug 23, 2024

1.7 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Microsoft
Supports multimodal inputs
Has open weights

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-vision-instruct

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Phi-3.5-vision-instruct.

Which is better, Claude 3.5 Haiku or Phi-3.5-vision-instruct?

Claude 3.5 Haiku (Anthropic) and Phi-3.5-vision-instruct (Microsoft) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.

How does Claude 3.5 Haiku compare to Phi-3.5-vision-instruct in benchmarks?

Claude 3.5 Haiku scores HumanEval: 88.1%, MGSM: 85.6%, DROP: 83.1%, MATH: 69.4%, MMLU-Pro: 65.0%. Phi-3.5-vision-instruct scores ScienceQA: 91.3%, POPE: 86.1%, MMBench: 81.9%, ChartQA: 81.8%, AI2D: 78.1%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude 3.5 Haiku and Phi-3.5-vision-instruct?

Claude 3.5 Haiku supports 200K tokens and Phi-3.5-vision-instruct supports an unknown number of 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 Phi-3.5-vision-instruct?

Key differences include multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude 3.5 Haiku and Phi-3.5-vision-instruct?

Claude 3.5 Haiku is developed by Anthropic and Phi-3.5-vision-instruct is developed by Microsoft.