+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Claude 3.5 Haiku leads with 19.2% higher average benchmark score. Claude 3.5 Haiku offers 144.0K more tokens in context window than Llama 3.2 3B Instruct. Llama 3.2 3B Instruct is $4.77 cheaper per million tokens. Claude 3.5 Haiku is available on 3 providers. Overall, Claude 3.5 Haiku is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku was developed as the next generation of Anthropic's fastest model, offering similar speed to Claude 3 Haiku while surpassing Claude 3 Opus on many intelligence benchmarks. Built with low latency, improved instruction following, and accurate tool use, it serves user-facing products, specialized sub-agent tasks, and data-heavy applications.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.2 3B was created as an ultra-compact open-source model, designed to enable on-device and edge deployment scenarios. Built with just 3 billion parameters while retaining instruction-following abilities, it brings Meta's language technology to mobile devices, IoT applications, and resource-constrained environments.
27 days newer
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Meta
2024-09-25
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Anthropic
2024-10-22
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input:$0.80
Output:$4.00
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Input:$0.01
Output:$0.02($4.77 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 3 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Average Score:65.5%(+19.2%)
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Average Score:46.3%
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Haiku
3 providers
Anthropic
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.3ms
Bedrock
Throughput: 104 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Avg Score:65.5%(+19.2%)
Providers:3
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Avg Score:46.3%
Providers:1