Which model is better: Claude 3.5 Haiku or Llama 4 Maverick?
Llama 4 Maverick is 75.0% cheaper for input tokens ($0.20 vs. $0.80 per 1M tokens) and $0.60 vs. $4.00 for output tokens (4.0x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, Llama 4 Maverick delivers lower response latency at 135ms TTFT (55ms faster than Claude 3.5 Haiku) with 175 vs. 130 tok/s throughput. Llama 4 Maverick leads coding evaluations at 62.4% SWE-bench Verified vs. 40.6% for Claude 3.5 Haiku and 73.8% vs. 41.6% on GPQA Diamond.
Verified daily via automated API latency tests and official documentation.
Zero-Shot RAG Verified
Verified Performance & Unit Economics Delta (12 Dimensions)
Daily synchronized metrics across token pricing, prompt cache economics, latency, throughput, and 5 capability benchmarks.
Metric / Dimension
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Llama 4 Maverick
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$0.80
$0.20
Llama 4 Maverick is 4.0x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$4.00
$0.60
Llama 4 Maverick (85.0% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$0.080
$0.050
Llama 4 Maverick is 1.6x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$1.00
$0.20
Llama 4 Maverick is 5.0x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
205k (8k out)
1,049k (33k out)
Llama 4 Maverick (5.1x larger context)
Avg TTFT Response Latency
190ms
135ms
Llama 4 Maverick (55ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
130 tok/s
175 tok/s
Llama 4 Maverick (+45 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
40.6%
62.4%
Llama 4 Maverick (+21.8% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
41.6%
73.8%
Llama 4 Maverick (+32.2% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
71%
84.5%
Llama 4 Maverick (+13.5% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
69.4%
91%
Llama 4 Maverick (+21.6% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
52.4 / 100
77 / 100
Llama 4 Maverick (+24.6 pts)
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.
Which is cheaper: Claude 3.5 Haiku or Llama 4 Maverick?
Llama 4 Maverick is cheaper at $0.20/1M input tokens ($0.60/1M output) compared to $0.80/1M input ($4.00/1M output) for Claude 3.5 Haiku.
Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: Claude 3.5 Haiku or Llama 4 Maverick?
Llama 4 Maverick delivers faster first-token latency at 135ms TTFT (175 tok/s throughput) compared to 190ms TTFT (130 tok/s) for Claude 3.5 Haiku.
How do Claude 3.5 Haiku and Llama 4 Maverick compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude 3.5 Haiku scores 40.6% versus 62.4% for Llama 4 Maverick. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude 3.5 Haiku scores 41.6% versus 73.8% for Llama 4 Maverick (and 69.4% vs 91% on MATH-500).
When should you choose Claude 3.5 Haiku?
Choose Claude 3.5 Haiku (Anthropic) for rapid customer-facing chat, sub-agent routing, and real-time code autocomplete — offering a 204k context window, 190ms TTFT, and $0.80/1M input pricing ($0.080/1M cached reads).
When should you choose Llama 4 Maverick?
Choose Llama 4 Maverick (Meta) for high-throughput open-weight multimodal assistants, enterprise RAG, and low-cost cloud inference on Groq and Cerebras — offering a 1,048k context window, 135ms TTFT, and $0.20/1M input pricing ($0.050/1M cached reads).
