Claude Haiku 3 vs Qwen Plus vs Mixtral 8x7B
Claude Haiku 3 comes out ahead, 56 to 53 and 36 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
AnthropicClaude Haiku 3
56/100- ECI118.4
- Price$0.25 / $1.25
- Context200K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen Plus
53/100- ECI—
- Price$0.40 / $1.20
- Context1M
Mistral AIMixtral 8x7B
36/100- ECI118.5
- Price$0.70 / $0.70
- Context32K
Claude Haiku 3 is our pick
Claude Haiku 3 is the better all-round choice, scoring 56/100 against Qwen Plus (53) and Mixtral 8x7B (36). It leads on price and inputs & features. Qwen Plus wins on context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceClaude Haiku 3Claude Haiku 3 $0.50 · Qwen Plus $0.60 · Mixtral 8x7B $0.70 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen PlusQwen Plus 1,000,000 · Claude Haiku 3 200,000 · Mixtral 8x7B 32,000 tokens
- Widest inputsClaude Haiku 3Claude Haiku 3: Text, Images, PDFs · Qwen Plus: Text · Mixtral 8x7B: Text
- Self-hostingMixtral 8x7BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Claude Haiku 3 | Qwen Plus | Mixtral 8x7B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 64 | 60 | 57 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 60 | 35 | 25 |
| Context window | 20% | 32 | 60 | 0 |
| Overall | 100% | 56/100 | 53/100 | 36/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Claude Haiku 3Anthropic | Qwen PlusAlibaba (Qwen) | Mixtral 8x7BMistral AI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 118.4 | — | 118.5 (best) |
| ECI rank | #143 of 148 | — | #142 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 36.3% (best) | — | 30.6% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 1.8% | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.25 (best) | $0.40 | $0.70 |
| Output | $1.25 | $1.20 | $0.70 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.50 (best) | $0.60 | $0.70 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 2 providers | Official Alibaba API | Official Mistral API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 200,000 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 32,000 tokens |
| Max output | 4,096 tokens | 32,768 tokens (best) | 32,000 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | No |
| PDFs | Yes | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | — | qwen-plus | open-mixtral-8x7b |
| API providers | 2 | 9 (best) | 1 |
| Released | Mar 13, 2024 | Jan 25, 2024 | Dec 11, 2023 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Aug 31, 2023 | Apr 2024 | Jan 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Claude Haiku 3$5.00
- Qwen Plus$6.40
- Mixtral 8x7B$8.40
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Claude Haiku 3, Qwen Plus or Mixtral 8x7B?
Claude Haiku 3 is the better all-round choice, scoring 56/100 against Qwen Plus (53) and Mixtral 8x7B (36). It leads on price and inputs & features. Qwen Plus wins on context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 3, Qwen Plus or Mixtral 8x7B?
Claude Haiku 3 is cheaper at $0.25 input / $1.25 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). Qwen Plus costs $0.40 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price); Mixtral 8x7B costs $0.70 input / $0.70 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.50 per million tokens for Claude Haiku 3 versus $0.60 for Qwen Plus (1.2× as much) and $0.70 for Mixtral 8x7B (1.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Claude Haiku 3 has an ECI of 118.4, Qwen Plus has not been scored yet and Mixtral 8x7B has an ECI of 118.5.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Claude Haiku 3, Qwen Plus and Mixtral 8x7B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen Plus has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 200,000 for Claude Haiku 3 and 32,000 for Mixtral 8x7B. Maximum output per response: Claude Haiku 3 up to 4,096, Qwen Plus up to 32,768, Mixtral 8x7B up to 32,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Claude Haiku 3 accepts text, images and PDFs; Qwen Plus accepts text; Mixtral 8x7B accepts text. Claude Haiku 3 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Mixtral 8x7B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Claude Haiku 3 and Qwen Plus is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Claude Haiku 3 is the newest, released Mar 13, 2024. Qwen Plus came out Jan 25, 2024; Mixtral 8x7B came out Dec 11, 2023. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Haiku 3 Aug 31, 2023, Qwen Plus Apr 2024, Mixtral 8x7B Jan 2024.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
