Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Llama 3.1 70B

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Llama 3.1 70B: Llama 3.1 70B is cheaper for input-heavy usage ($0.88/M vs $1.00/M input tokens), while Claude Haiku 4.5 is better for long-context tasks (200,000 tokens).

Direct answer: choose Llama 3.1 70B for lower token spend and choose Claude Haiku 4.5 when your workload needs longer context.

Compare input and output token pricing, context windows, and monthly cost estimates on one page so you can pick the cheaper model fast.

Anthropic

Claude Haiku 4.5

Meta (via Together AI)

Llama 3.1 70B

Try Anthropic →Try Meta (via Together AI) →

Claude Haiku 4.5 pricing page Llama 3.1 70B pricing page Anthropic provider overview Meta (via Together AI) provider overview

Cost Comparison (1000 input + 500 output tokens, 100 requests/day)

Claude Haiku 4.5

Per Request:$0.003500

Daily:$0.35

Monthly:$10.50

Yearly:$127.75

Llama 3.1 70B

Per Request:$0.001320

Daily:$0.132

Monthly:$3.96

Yearly:$48.18

Cost Differences

$0.002180

Per Request

$0.218

Daily

$6.54

Monthly

$79.57

Yearly

Llama 3.1 70B costs less than Claude Haiku 4.5

Quick Recommendation

Winner for direct API pricing: Llama 3.1 70B. At the default workload, Llama 3.1 70B saves about $6.54/month ($79.57/year) versus Claude Haiku 4.5.

Claude Haiku 4.5 full pricing breakdown Llama 3.1 70B full pricing breakdown Anthropic API pricing details Meta (via Together AI) API pricing details Anthropic vs Meta (via Together AI) API pricing Codex Mini vs Claude Opus 4.7 Codex Mini vs Claude Opus 4.6

Feature Comparison

Feature	Claude Haiku 4.5	Llama 3.1 70B
Provider	Anthropic	Meta (via Together AI)
Input Price	$1.00/1M tokens	$0.88/1M tokens
Output Price	$5.00/1M tokens	$0.88/1M tokens
Context Window	200,000 tokens	128,000 tokens
Max Output	64,000 tokens	32,768 tokens
Category	efficient	balanced
Capabilities	textvision	textcode
Release Date	10/15/2025	7/23/2024

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Llama 3.1 70B: Which Should You Choose?

Choosing between Claude Haiku 4.5 and Llama 3.1 70B depends on your priorities: cost efficiency, context length, or raw capability. Llama 3.1 70B is the more affordable option at $0.88/1M input tokens — 12% cheaper than Claude Haiku 4.5. Meanwhile, Claude Haiku 4.5 offers a significantly larger context window at 200,000 tokens vs 128,000 for Llama 3.1 70B.

These models come from different providers — Anthropic and Meta (via Together AI) — which means different API ecosystems, SDKs, rate limits, and terms of service. If you're already integrated with Anthropic, switching to Meta (via Together AI)involves migration effort beyond just pricing. Factor in your existing infrastructure when deciding.

These models target different tiers: Claude Haiku 4.5 is a efficient model while Llama 3.1 70B is balanced. This means they're optimized for different workloads. Llama 3.1 70B targets more demanding workloads, while Claude Haiku 4.5 provides a cost-effective option for everyday tasks.

Output costs matter too. Claude Haiku 4.5 charges $5.00/1M output tokens vs $0.88 for Llama 3.1 70B. For generation-heavy workloads (content creation, code generation, summarization), output pricing often dominates your bill. Llama 3.1 70B has the edge here at $0.88/1M output tokens.

Multimodal capabilities: Claude Haiku 4.5 supports vision (image inputs) while Llama 3.1 70B is text-only. If your application needs image understanding, this narrows your choice.

Best Use Cases

Choose Claude Haiku 4.5 when:

• You need a larger context window (200,000 tokens)
• You need longer outputs (up to 64,000 tokens)
• You're already using Anthropic's API ecosystem
• You're running high-volume, latency-sensitive workloads

Choose Llama 3.1 70B when:

• Budget is a primary concern
• You're already using Meta (via Together AI)'s API ecosystem

Pros and Caveats at a Glance

Claude Haiku 4.5

• Input pricing: $1.00/M tokens
• Output pricing: $5.00/M tokens
• Context window: 200,000 tokens
• Max output: 64,000 tokens

Watch out for

• Higher input cost than Llama 3.1 70B
• Higher output cost than Llama 3.1 70B

Llama 3.1 70B

• Input pricing: $0.88/M tokens
• Output pricing: $0.88/M tokens
• Context window: 128,000 tokens
• Max output: 32,768 tokens

Watch out for

• Smaller context window than Claude Haiku 4.5

Try Different Scenarios

Use the calculator below to see how costs change with different usage patterns

Claude Haiku 4.5 (Anthropic)

Cost Calculator

Provider

Model

Input Tokens

Output Tokens

Requests/Day

Select a provider and model to see costs

Llama 3.1 70B (Meta (via Together AI))

Cost Calculator

Provider

Model

Input Tokens

Output Tokens

Requests/Day

Select a provider and model to see costs

Start using Claude Haiku 4.5 today

Start using Llama 3.1 70B today

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Llama 3.1 70B?▼

Llama 3.1 70B is cheaper for input tokens at $0.88 per million tokens vs $1.00 for Claude Haiku 4.5 — that's 12% savings on input costs.

What is the context window difference between Claude Haiku 4.5 and Llama 3.1 70B?▼

Claude Haiku 4.5 supports 200,000 tokens while Llama 3.1 70B supports 128,000 tokens — a difference of 72,000 tokens in favor of Claude Haiku 4.5.

Which model is better for AI Chatbot?▼

Both models support text. For ai chatbot, Llama 3.1 70B is the lower-cost option, while Claude Haiku 4.5 offers a larger context window (200,000 vs 128,000 tokens). Choose Llama 3.1 70B for budget sensitivity or Claude Haiku 4.5 for longer context tasks.

Which model has better overall pricing for heavy usage?▼

At 100 requests/day with 1,000 input and 500 output tokens each, Claude Haiku 4.5 costs about $10.50/month and Llama 3.1 70B costs about $3.96/month. Overall, Llama 3.1 70B has lower combined input + output rates ($0.88 in, $0.88 out) vs Claude Haiku 4.5.

Where can I compare Anthropic and Meta (via Together AI) API pricing beyond this model matchup?▼

See the Anthropic vs Meta (via Together AI) provider comparison page for lineup-level averages, then review each model page for exact per-token rates.