+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Claude 3 Haiku vs Llama 4 Scout
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Llama 4 Scout leads with 13.8% higher average benchmark score. Llama 4 Scout offers 19.6M more tokens in context window than Claude 3 Haiku. Llama 4 Scout is $1.12 cheaper per million tokens. Llama 4 Scout is available on 6 providers. Overall, Llama 4 Scout is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Anthropic
Claude 3 Haiku was created as the fastest and most affordable model in its intelligence class, processing 21K tokens per second for prompts under 32K tokens. Built for enterprise workloads requiring quick analysis of large datasets, it combines state-of-the-art vision capabilities with strong performance on industry benchmarks while prioritizing speed, affordability, and enterprise-grade security.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 4 Scout was created as an exploratory variant in the Llama 4 family, designed to investigate new architectures and optimization strategies. Built as part of Meta's commitment to advancing open-source AI, it serves as a testbed for innovations that may inform future model releases.
1 year newer
Claude 3 Haiku
Anthropic
2024-03-13
Llama 4 Scout
Meta
2025-04-05
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Claude 3 Haiku
Input:$0.25
Output:$1.25
+
+
+
+
Llama 4 Scout
Input:$0.08
Output:$0.30($1.12 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 4 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Claude 3 Haiku
Average Score:55.6%
+
+
+
+
Llama 4 Scout
Average Score:69.4%(+13.8%)
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Claude 3 Haiku
3 providers
Anthropic
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Bedrock
Throughput: 104 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Claude 3 Haiku
Avg Score:55.6%
Providers:3
+
+
+
+
Llama 4 Scout
Avg Score:69.4%(+13.8%)
Providers:6