Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking
Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking leads the LLM Stats Score 12.9 to 5.2. Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking is 4.9x cheaper per token.
Anthropic · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking leads the overall LLM Stats Score 12.9 to 5.2, ranking #249 overall.
In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking is roughly 4.9x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking also accepts a larger context window (262,144 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
- you want predictable pricing at $0.80/M input and $4.00/M output
Choose Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking
- overall performance matters — it scores 12.9 and ranks #249 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
- cost matters — it's about 4.9x cheaper per token
- you process long inputs — it offers a 262,144 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2025
- 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 · 48 for Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking
Claude 3.5 Haiku outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking is better at 2 benchmarks (GPQA, MMLU-Pro).
Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking 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 8.0x more expensive than Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking ($0.10/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude 3.5 Haiku ($4.00/1M tokens) is 4.0x more expensive than Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking ($1.00/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Claude 3.5 Haiku is more expensive than Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking accepts 262,144 input tokens compared to Claude 3.5 Haiku's 200,000 tokens. Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while Claude 3.5 Haiku is limited to 200,000 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking supports multimodal inputs, whereas Claude 3.5 Haiku does not.
Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking
License
Usage and distribution terms
Claude 3.5 Haiku is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking uses Apache 2.0.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Proprietary
Closed source
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Claude 3.5 Haiku was released on 2024-10-22, while Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking was released on 2025-09-22.
Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking is 11 months newer than Claude 3.5 Haiku.
Oct 22, 2024
1.9 years ago
Sep 22, 2025
12 months ago
11mo newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
Claude 3.5 Haiku is available from Bedrock, Google, Anthropic. Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking is available from DeepInfra.
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude 3.5 Haiku and Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Qwen3 VL 4B Thinking.