The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Claude Haiku 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 50.0 to 0.4.

Anthropic · NVIDIA · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Haiku 5.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 50.0 to 0.4, ranking #19 overall.

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 — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

Choose Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

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

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Haiku 5.5
Anthropic
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
NVIDIA
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
50.0
#19
0.4
#340
Reasoning
47.2
#27
0.1
#333
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
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
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Math
25.7#110
7.0#272
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

36 reported for Claude Haiku 5.5 · 11 for Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

No common benchmarks found

Claude Haiku 5.5 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instructdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

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
NVIDIA
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Haiku 5.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct does not.

Claude Haiku 5.5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Haiku 5.5 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct uses Llama 3.1 Community License.

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

Claude Haiku 5.5

Proprietary

Closed source

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Llama 3.1 Community License

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Haiku 5.5 was released on 2026-10-07, while Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct was released on 2024-10-01.

Claude Haiku 5.5 is 25 months newer than Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Oct 7, 2026

1 days ago

2.0yr newer
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Oct 1, 2024

2.0 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Haiku 5.5 has a knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct has a cutoff of 2023-12-01.

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 Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct (2023-12-01).

Claude Haiku 5.5

Jun 2026

2.5 yr newer
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Dec 2023

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Haiku 5.5 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Haiku 5.5
✓ Preferred
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct.

Which is better, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct?

Claude Haiku 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 50.0 to 0.4. Claude Haiku 5.5 is made by Anthropic and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct is made by NVIDIA. 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 Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct 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%. Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct scores GSM8k: 91.4%, HellaSwag: 85.6%, Winogrande: 84.5%, GSM8K Chat: 81.9%, MMLU Chat: 80.6%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Haiku 5.5 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct?

Claude Haiku 5.5 supports 1.0M tokens and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B 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 Haiku 5.5 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (50.0 vs 0.4), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Llama 3.1 Community License). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Haiku 5.5 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct?

Claude Haiku 5.5 is developed by Anthropic and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct is developed by NVIDIA.

Related comparisons