The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude 3 Haiku vs Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

Claude 3 Haiku and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct are closely matched at -1.2 and 2.0 on the LLM Stats Score.

Anthropic · Microsoft · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude 3 Haiku and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at -1.2 and 2.0.

In the 9 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct wins 5; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude 3 Haiku

  • you want predictable pricing at $0.25/M input and $1.25/M output

Choose Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 5 of 9 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2024
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude 3 Haiku
Anthropic
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Microsoft
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
-1.2
#319
2.0
#302
Reasoning
-1.3
#312
1.5
#296
Coding
0.7
#225
-3.8
#240
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
4 of 9
5 of 9
Input price
$0.25 / M
— / M
Output price
$1.25 / M
— / M
Context window
200,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude 3 Haiku
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Math
4.7#272
4.7#273
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

10 reported for Claude 3 Haiku · 31 for Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

9 shared

Claude 3 Haiku outperforms in 4 benchmarks (GSM8k, HellaSwag, HumanEval, MGSM), while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is better at 5 benchmarks (ARC-C, BIG-Bench Hard, GPQA, MATH, MMLU).

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct has a slight edge in benchmark performance.

Wed Sep 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude 3 Haiku specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude 3 Haiku specifies output context (200,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude 3 Haiku
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Wed Sep 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude 3 Haiku supports multimodal inputs, whereas Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct does not.

Claude 3 Haiku can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude 3 Haiku

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3 Haiku is licensed under a proprietary license, while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct uses MIT.

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

Claude 3 Haiku

Proprietary

Closed source

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3 Haiku was released on 2024-03-13, while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct was released on 2024-08-23.

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is 5 months newer than Claude 3 Haiku.

Claude 3 Haiku

Mar 13, 2024

2.5 years ago

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

Aug 23, 2024

2.0 years ago

5mo newer

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→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude 3 Haiku and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude 3 Haiku
✓ Preferred
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3 Haiku vs Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct.

Which is better, Claude 3 Haiku or Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct?

Claude 3 Haiku and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at -1.2 and 2.0. Claude 3 Haiku is made by Anthropic and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is made by Microsoft. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude 3 Haiku compare to Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct in benchmarks?

Claude 3 Haiku scores ARC-C: 89.2%, GSM8k: 88.9%, HellaSwag: 85.9%, DROP: 78.4%, HumanEval: 75.9%. Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct scores ARC-C: 91.0%, OpenBookQA: 89.6%, GSM8k: 88.7%, PIQA: 88.6%, RULER: 87.1%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude 3 Haiku and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct?

Claude 3 Haiku supports 200K tokens and Phi-3.5-MoE-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 Haiku and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (-1.2 vs 2.0), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude 3 Haiku and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct?

Claude 3 Haiku is developed by Anthropic and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is developed by Microsoft.

Related comparisons