Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash
Anthropic's Claude Haiku 4.5 and Google's Gemini 3.5 Flash both target production language workloads, but they price and behave differently. Here is the side-by-side.
Pricing checked against provider documentation on . How we verify
The short answer
Claude Haiku 4.5 is the cheaper option — roughly 1.7x less on a blended workload, and it suits lowest-latency claude responses. Gemini 3.5 Flash justifies its premium when you need agentic loops and sub-agent fleets.
Anthropic • Claude 4.5
$1.00 / $5.00
/ 1M tokens (input / output)
The fastest model Anthropic ships, still on the Claude 4.5 generation with a 200K window and an early-2025 knowledge cutoff. Worth it when response latency is the product requirement; otherwise Sonnet 5 offers more capability and five times the context for twice the price.
Google • Gemini 3.5
$1.50 / $9.00
/ 1M tokens (input / output)
Google's most capable Flash model, tuned for the agentic era: sub-agent deployment, multi-step workflows, and rapid coding iterations at scale. Supports search grounding, function calling, structured outputs, and computer use in preview. Note that it is pricier than the Gemini 3 Flash preview it replaced.
Input price
Gemini 3.5 Flash is 50% more expensive than Claude Haiku 4.5 on input tokens.
Output price
Gemini 3.5 Flash is 80% more expensive than Claude Haiku 4.5 on output tokens — usually the side that dominates the bill.
Monthly cost at three workload sizes
Standard (non-batch, non-cached) rates. Reasoning models will exceed these figures because thinking tokens bill as output.
| Workload | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Light — 1M in / 200K out | $2 | $3 | $1 |
| Moderate — 10M in / 2M out | $20 | $33 | $13 |
| Heavy — 100M in / 20M out | $200 | $330 | $130 |
Specification comparison
| Attribute | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Input (/ 1M tokens) | $1.00 | $1.50 |
| Output (/ 1M tokens) | $5.00 | $9.00 |
| Cached input | $0.10 | — |
| Context window | 200,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens |
| Max output | 64,000 tokens | 65,536 tokens |
| Native reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-02 | 2025-01 |
| Relative latency | low | low |
| Open weights | No | No |
| API model ID | claude-haiku-4-5 | gemini-3.5-flash |
| Status | stable | stable |
Gemini 3.5 Flash: Flat rate at any context length, unlike Gemini 3.1 Pro's 200K cliff.
Choose Claude Haiku 4.5 if…
- Real-time chat suggestions
- Lightweight extraction and tagging
- Guardrail and routing calls
- High-frequency background jobs
Choose Gemini 3.5 Flash if…
- Sub-agent fleets and orchestration
- Fast coding iteration loops
- Search-grounded answers
- Multimodal ingestion at scale
Frequently asked
Is Claude Haiku 4.5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash cheaper?
Claude Haiku 4.5 is cheaper. On a blended 3:1 input-to-output workload it costs about 1.7x less than Gemini 3.5 Flash.
Which has the larger context window, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash?
Gemini 3.5 Flash has the larger window at 1.05M tokens versus 200K.
Should I use Claude Haiku 4.5 or Gemini 3.5 Flash?
Pick Claude Haiku 4.5 for lowest-latency claude responses. Pick Gemini 3.5 Flash for agentic loops and sub-agent fleets. If cost dominates the decision, Claude Haiku 4.5 wins; if you need the capability ceiling, benchmark both on your own evals before committing.