ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct vs Claude Haiku 3.5

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct comes out ahead, 64 to 44 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Meta

    Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct

    Released Sep 25, 2024

    64/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.055 / $0.345
    • Context128K
    Full specs Remove Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct

  2. Anthropic

    Claude Haiku 3.5

    Released Oct 22, 2024

    44/100
    • ECI127.0
    • Price$0.80 / $4.00
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove Claude Haiku 3.5

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is our pick

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 64/100 against Claude Haiku 3.5 (44). It leads on price. Claude Haiku 3.5 wins on inputs & features and 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 priceLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct $0.128 · Claude Haiku 3.5 $1.60 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextClaude Haiku 3.5Claude Haiku 3.5 200,000 · Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsClaude Haiku 3.5Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct: Text, Images · Claude Haiku 3.5: Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructClaude Haiku 3.5
Price50%8838
Inputs & features30%5060
Context window20%2432
Overall100%64/10044/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct vs Claude Haiku 3.5 specifications side by side
SpecificationLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructMetaClaude Haiku 3.5Anthropic
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)—127.0
ECI rank—#147 of 165
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—38.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—4.3%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.055 (best)$0.80
Output$0.345 (best)$4.00
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.128 (best)$1.60
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 3 providersMedian of 3 providers
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens200,000 tokens (best)
Max output4,096 tokens8,192 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoYes
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningNoNo
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietary
API model ID——
API providers44
ReleasedSep 25, 2024Oct 22, 2024
Knowledge cutoffDec 2023Jul 31, 2024
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct$1.24
  • Claude Haiku 3.5$16.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct or Claude Haiku 3.5?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 64/100 against Claude Haiku 3.5 (44). It leads on price. Claude Haiku 3.5 wins on inputs & features and 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, Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct or Claude Haiku 3.5?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is cheaper at $0.055 input / $0.345 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). Claude Haiku 3.5 costs $0.80 input / $4.00 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.128 per million tokens for Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct versus $1.60 for Claude Haiku 3.5 (13× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct has not been scored yet and Claude Haiku 3.5 has an ECI of 127.0.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct and Claude Haiku 3.5 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Haiku 3.5 has the largest context window at 200,000 tokens, against 128,000 for Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct. Maximum output per response: Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct up to 4,096, Claude Haiku 3.5 up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct accepts text and images; Claude Haiku 3.5 accepts text, images and PDFs. Claude Haiku 3.5 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Claude Haiku 3.5 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Claude Haiku 3.5 is the newest, released Oct 22, 2024. Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct came out Sep 25, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct Dec 2023, Claude Haiku 3.5 Jul 31, 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 Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons