Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct vs Claude Haiku 4.5
Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct comes out ahead, 62 to 58 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
MetaLlama 4 Scout 17B Instruct
62/100- ECI129.7
- Price$0.225 / $0.69
- Context10M
AnthropicClaude Haiku 4.5
58/100- ECI142.4
- Price$1.00 / $5.00
- Context200K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct is our pick
Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 62/100 against Claude Haiku 4.5 (58). It leads on price and context window. Claude Haiku 4.5 wins on capability and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityClaude Haiku 4.5Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Haiku 4.5 142.4 · Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 129.7
- Lowest priceLlama 4 Scout 17B InstructLlama 4 Scout 17B Instruct $0.341 · Claude Haiku 4.5 $2.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextLlama 4 Scout 17B InstructLlama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 10,000,000 · Claude Haiku 4.5 200,000 tokens
- Widest inputsClaude Haiku 4.5Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct: Text, Images · Claude Haiku 4.5: Text, Images, PDFs
- Self-hostingLlama 4 Scout 17B InstructPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct | Claude Haiku 4.5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 52 | 69 |
| Price | 25% | 72 | 36 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 50 | 80 |
| Context window | 10% | 100 | 32 |
| Overall | 100% | 62/100 | 58/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Llama 4 Scout 17B InstructMeta | Claude Haiku 4.5Anthropic |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 129.7 | 142.4 (best) |
| ECI rank | #126 of 148 | #90 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 51.8% | 71.2% (best) |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 7.8% | 66.7% (best) |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | 13.2% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.225 (best) | $1.00 |
| Output | $0.69 (best) | $5.00 |
| Cached input | — | $0.10 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.341 (best) | $2.00 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 4 providers | Official Anthropic API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 10,000,000 tokens (best) | 200,000 tokens |
| Max output | 16,384 tokens | 64,000 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | Yes |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | claude-haiku-4-5 |
| API providers | 4 | 34 (best) |
| Released | Apr 5, 2025 | Oct 15, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Aug 2024 | Feb 28, 2025 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct$3.63
- Claude Haiku 4.5$20.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct or Claude Haiku 4.5?
Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 62/100 against Claude Haiku 4.5 (58). It leads on price and context window. Claude Haiku 4.5 wins on capability and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct or Claude Haiku 4.5?
Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct is cheaper at $0.225 input / $0.69 output per million tokens (median across 4 API providers). Claude Haiku 4.5 costs $1.00 input / $5.00 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.341 per million tokens for Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct versus $2.00 for Claude Haiku 4.5 (5.9× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Claude Haiku 4.5 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Haiku 4.5 142.4 (#90 of 148) and Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 129.7 (#126 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (139.5–144.3 vs 124.8–131.4), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Claude Haiku 4.5 71.2%, Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 51.8%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Claude Haiku 4.5 66.7%, Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 7.8%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct and Claude Haiku 4.5 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Claude Haiku 4.5 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct has the largest context window at 10,000,000 tokens, against 200,000 for Claude Haiku 4.5. Maximum output per response: Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct up to 16,384, Claude Haiku 4.5 up to 64,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct accepts text and images; Claude Haiku 4.5 accepts text, images and PDFs. Claude Haiku 4.5 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Claude Haiku 4.5 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Claude Haiku 4.5 is the newest, released Oct 15, 2025. Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct came out Apr 5, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct Aug 2024, Claude Haiku 4.5 Feb 28, 2025.
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.
Related comparisons
- Add Mistral Small 3.1 24BThree-way comparison
- Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct vs Mistral Small 3.1 24BMistral AI · ECI 127.5
- Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct vs DeepSeek-V3DeepSeek · ECI 132.3
- Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct vs Gemma 3 27B ITGoogle · ECI 130.0
- Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct vs Qwen3 8BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 136.2
- Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Qwen3 MaxAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 142.4
- Claude Haiku 4.5 vs GLM-4.7Z.ai (Zhipu) · ECI 143.5
