Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
Claude Haiku 4.5 (2025) and Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (2026) are general-purpose language models from Anthropic and Google DeepMind. Claude Haiku 4.5 ships a 200k-token context window, while Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite ships a 1M-token context window. On pricing, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite costs $0.25/1M input tokens versus $0.8/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, capabilities, benchmarks, provider availability, and production fit.
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite is ~220% cheaper at $0.25/1M; pay for Claude Haiku 4.5 only for coding workflow support.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | Coding, RAG, and Agents |
| Context window | 200k | 1M |
| Cheapest output | $4/1M tokens | $1.5/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 7 tracked | 2 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 0 rows | 0 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- Claude Haiku 4.5 has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Local decision data tags Claude Haiku 4.5 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $1.5/1M tokens.
- Local decision data tags Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output prices on this page.
Claude Haiku 4.5
$1,640
Cheapest tracked route: AWS Bedrock
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
$575
Cheapest tracked route: Google AI Studio
Estimated monthly gap: $1,065. Batch, cache, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.
Switch friction
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite is $2.5/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Claude Haiku 4.5 is $2.5/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2025-10-01 | 2026-05-07 |
| Context window | 200k | 1M |
| Parameters | — | — |
| Architecture | decoder only | decoder only |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-02 | 2025-01 |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.8/1M tokens | $0.25/1M tokens |
| Output price | $4/1M tokens | $1.5/1M tokens |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Capability | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | Yes | Yes |
| Multimodal | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Function calling | Yes | Yes |
| Tool use | Yes | Yes |
| Structured outputs | Yes | Yes |
| Code execution | Yes | Yes |
Benchmarks
No shared benchmark rows are currently sourced for this pair.
Deep dive
The capability footprint is close: both models cover vision, multimodal input, function calling, tool use, and structured outputs. That makes context budget, benchmark fit, and provider maturity more important than a simple checklist. If your application depends on one integration detail, verify it against the provider route you plan to use, not just the base model listing.
For cost, Claude Haiku 4.5 lists $0.8/1M input and $4/1M output tokens, while Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite lists $0.25/1M input and $1.5/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite lower by about $1.13 per million blended tokens. Availability is 7 providers versus 2, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose Claude Haiku 4.5 when coding workflow support and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite when coding workflow support, larger context windows, and lower input-token cost are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship. This keeps the decision grounded in measurable tradeoffs instead of brand-level assumptions. It also helps separate model capability from provider packaging, which can change cost and latency.
FAQ
Which has a larger context window, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite?
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite supports 1M tokens, while Claude Haiku 4.5 supports 200k tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite?
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Claude Haiku 4.5 costs $0.8/1M input and $4/1M output tokens. Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite costs $0.25/1M input and $1.5/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is Claude Haiku 4.5 or Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite open source?
Claude Haiku 4.5 is listed under Proprietary. Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite is listed under Proprietary. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.
Which is better for vision, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite?
Both Claude Haiku 4.5 and Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite expose vision. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface.
Which is better for multimodal input, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite?
Both Claude Haiku 4.5 and Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite expose multimodal input. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface.
Where can I run Claude Haiku 4.5 and Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite?
Claude Haiku 4.5 is available on Microsoft Foundry, Anthropic, Snowflake Cortex, AWS Bedrock, and GCP Vertex AI. Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite is available on Google AI Studio and OpenRouter. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-05-19. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.