Which model is better: Claude 3.5 Haiku or Gemini 3.8 Flash?
Gemini 3.8 Flash is 68.8% cheaper for input tokens ($0.25 vs. $0.80 per 1M tokens) and $1.50 vs. $4.00 for output tokens (3.2x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, Gemini 3.8 Flash delivers lower response latency at 105ms TTFT (85ms faster than Claude 3.5 Haiku) with 210 vs. 130 tok/s throughput. Gemini 3.8 Flash leads coding evaluations at 68.5% SWE-bench Verified vs. 40.6% for Claude 3.5 Haiku and 79.2% 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
Gemini 3.8 Flash
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$0.80
$0.25
Gemini 3.8 Flash is 3.2x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$4.00
$1.50
Gemini 3.8 Flash (62.5% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$0.080
$0.025
Gemini 3.8 Flash is 3.2x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$1.00
$0.25
Gemini 3.8 Flash is 4.0x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
205k (8k out)
1,049k (66k out)
Gemini 3.8 Flash (5.1x larger context)
Avg TTFT Response Latency
190ms
105ms
Gemini 3.8 Flash (85ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
130 tok/s
210 tok/s
Gemini 3.8 Flash (+80 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
40.6%
68.5%
Gemini 3.8 Flash (+27.9% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
41.6%
79.2%
Gemini 3.8 Flash (+37.6% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
71%
87.4%
Gemini 3.8 Flash (+16.4% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
69.4%
95.1%
Gemini 3.8 Flash (+25.7% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
52.4 / 100
74 / 100
Gemini 3.8 Flash (+21.6 pts)
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.
Choose Gemini 3.8 Flash (Google) for high-throughput agentic workflows, real-time multimodal RAG, live search grounding, and production code generation at flash unit economics — offering a 1,048k context window, 105ms TTFT, and $0.25/1M input pricing ($0.025/1M cached reads).
Which is cheaper: Claude 3.5 Haiku or Gemini 3.8 Flash?
Gemini 3.8 Flash is cheaper at $0.25/1M input tokens ($1.50/1M 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 Gemini 3.8 Flash?
Gemini 3.8 Flash delivers faster first-token latency at 105ms TTFT (210 tok/s throughput) compared to 190ms TTFT (130 tok/s) for Claude 3.5 Haiku.
How do Claude 3.5 Haiku and Gemini 3.8 Flash compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude 3.5 Haiku scores 40.6% versus 68.5% for Gemini 3.8 Flash. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude 3.5 Haiku scores 41.6% versus 79.2% for Gemini 3.8 Flash (and 69.4% vs 95.1% 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 Gemini 3.8 Flash?
Choose Gemini 3.8 Flash (Google) for high-throughput agentic workflows, real-time multimodal RAG, live search grounding, and production code generation at flash unit economics — offering a 1,048k context window, 105ms TTFT, and $0.25/1M input pricing ($0.025/1M cached reads).
