Compare

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Llama 4 Scout

Anthropic vs Meta. Specs, benchmarks, and real per-task cost — all in one page.

Verdict

Claude Haiku 4.5 leads on LMSYS ELO (1305 vs 1265). Llama 4 Scout is ~3.5× cheaper on a 3:1 input:output blend. Llama 4 Scout is open-weights, the other is proprietary.

Anthropic

Claude Haiku 4.5

Fast, cheap, and smart enough for most routing and extraction tasks. Great base model for subagents.

Sub-second latency10x cheaper than OpusStrong structured output

Meta

Llama 4 Scout

The 70B workhorse open-weight. Fits on a single H100, beloved by self-hosters.

Single-GPU deployableDirt cheap on aggregatorsStrong fine-tuning base

Pricing

Input / 1M$0.80$0.35

Output / 1M$4.00$0.80

Context200K128K

Max output16K8K

LicenseProprietaryOpen weights

Released2025-10-012025-12-10

Benchmarks

LMSYS ELO1305.01265.0

MMLU Pro81.477.2

HumanEval87.082.4

SWE-Bench49.2—

MATH76.872.5

IFEval87.384.1

Per-task cost

Summarize a 1-hour meeting transcript$0.014$0.0057

Review a 500-line pull request$0.014$0.0044

Answer a customer support ticket$0.0056$0.0017

Extract structured data from a resume$0.0080$0.0026

Debug a stack trace with context$0.013$0.0037

Per-call cost using published token counts for each task. Real-world prompts vary.

Tool

Interactive compare →

Add up to four models, tweak tasks live.