The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

Claude Haiku 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 50.0 to -5.2.

Anthropic · Google · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Haiku 5.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 50.0 to -5.2, ranking #19 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Haiku 5.5 wins 1; 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 Haiku 5.5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 50.0 and ranks #19 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

Choose Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Haiku 5.5
Anthropic
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview
Google
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
50.0
#19
-5.2
#372
Reasoning
47.2
#27
-5.9
#367
Coding
40.2
#13
-0.1
#256
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
$0.10 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.50 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude Haiku 5.5
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview
Math
25.7#110
-1.3#308
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

36 reported for Claude Haiku 5.5 · 28 for Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

1 shared

Claude Haiku 5.5 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (Global-MMLU), while Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Haiku 5.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Oct 08 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 Haiku 5.5 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Claude Haiku 5.5 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Haiku 5.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Google
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude Haiku 5.5 and Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Haiku 5.5 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview uses Gemma.

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

Claude Haiku 5.5

Proprietary

Closed source

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

Gemma

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Haiku 5.5 was released on 2026-10-07, while Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview was released on 2025-05-20.

Claude Haiku 5.5 is 17 months newer than Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Oct 7, 2026

1 days ago

1.4yr newer
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

May 20, 2025

1.4 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Haiku 5.5 has a knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview has a cutoff of 2024-06-01.

Claude Haiku 5.5 has more recent training data (up to 2026-06-01), making it potentially better informed about events through that date compared to Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview (2024-06-01).

Claude Haiku 5.5

Jun 2026

2 yr newer
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

Jun 2024

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Haiku 5.5 and Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Haiku 5.5
✓ Preferred
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview.

Which is better, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview?

Claude Haiku 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 50.0 to -5.2. Claude Haiku 5.5 is made by Anthropic and Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview is made by Google. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Haiku 5.5 compare to Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview in benchmarks?

Claude Haiku 5.5 scores Global-MMLU: 87.8%, MILU: 87.6%, BenchCAD (with Python tool): 87.0%, Chartography: 86.2%, SWE-bench Multilingual: 83.7%. Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview scores ARC-E: 81.6%, BoolQ: 81.6%, PIQA: 81.0%, HellaSwag: 78.6%, HumanEval: 75.0%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Haiku 5.5 and Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview?

Claude Haiku 5.5 supports 1.0M tokens and Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview 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 Haiku 5.5 and Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (50.0 vs -5.2), licensing (Proprietary vs Gemma). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Haiku 5.5 and Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview?

Claude Haiku 5.5 is developed by Anthropic and Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview is developed by Google.

Related comparisons