Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Claude Haiku 5.5 costs 3.0x less per output token than Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite ($0.50 vs $1.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 9 benchmarks have a result for both.
Claude Haiku 5.5 or Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: which to pick
Only Claude Haiku 5.5 has a coding score, 70.7 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite for a larger context window (1.05M against 1M tokens).
- Shared results
- 9
- Claude Haiku 5.5 only
- 54
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite only
- 7
- Like-for-like categories
- 5 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Claude Haiku 5.5 has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Claude Haiku 5.5 has a AA Intelligence Index result, 43.4.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Claude Haiku 5.5 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1262.
Directional only
General
Vals Index
No call
Only Claude Haiku 5.5 has a Vals Index result, 58.7%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens against 1M.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Claude Haiku 5.5
Claude Haiku 5.5 $0.0003, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite $0.0010 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Claude Haiku 5.5 70.7 from 5 benchmarks, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Math, 33.1 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3: Claude Haiku 5.5 75.1% against Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 27.7%, 47.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Claude Haiku 5.5 $0.50 against Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite $1.50 per million output tokens, 3.0x apart.
- Context window
- Claude Haiku 5.5 takes 1M tokens, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 1.05M.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Bars | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 1 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 2 | 0 | ||
| Math | 2 | 0 | ||
| General | 3 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 9 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | 91.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| LMArena WebDev | 1586 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | 36.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 90.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | 44.6% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | 2.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| IOI (Vals AI) | 47.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI) | 44.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI) | 20.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| CyberBench (Vals AI) | 75.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| SciCode | 55.0% | 43.4% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 24.2% | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| FrontierCode | 46.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| FrontierSWE | 43.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| WeirdML | Not measured | 52.2% | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1605 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1569 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| SciCode | 9.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 43.4 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 159.3 | 144.3 | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index16 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench research | 81.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| LiveBench browser | 80.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| LiveBench long agentic | 57.6% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| SREBench (Vals AI) | 5.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | 54.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | 31.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 43.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI) | 4.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | 59.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| BioMysteryBench (Vals AI) | 70.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI) | 10.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Vals Science Index | 38.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 31.3% | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| APEX-Agents | 56.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| DeepResearch Bench | Not measured | 37.3% | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | $3,602 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench reasoning | 82.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| MysteryMechanism (Vals AI) | 35.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 82.2% | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 44.4% | 17.2% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 89.6% | 81.8% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| ARC-AGI | 89.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 61.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Chess puzzles | 55.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | 30.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| EBR-bench | 43.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | Not measured | 67.2% | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 98.9% | 80.0% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 75.1% | 27.7% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 46.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| ProofBench | 89.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 51.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 23.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1262 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1291 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1313 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1294 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1342 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1278 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| LiveBench design | 83.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vals Index | 58.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| LiveBench data analysis | 53.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | 63.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 45.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 89.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| IFBench | Not measured | 77.2% | Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 82.7% | 74.3% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| DTBench | 95.0% | 76.8% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| LMCA | 51.1% | 35.0% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| Furniture assembly | 47.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Claude Haiku 5.5 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Claude Haiku 5.5 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Claude Haiku 5.5 costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Anthropic Claude Haiku 5.5 | Google Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Anthropic | |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | October 7, 2026 | May 7, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.10 | $0.25 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.50 | $1.50 |
| Coding index | 70.7 | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 5 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Claude Haiku 5.5 better than Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite for coding?
Only Claude Haiku 5.5 has a coding score, 70.7 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite for a larger context window (1.05M against 1M tokens).
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite?
Claude Haiku 5.5 costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs $0.25 and $1.50. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite?
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks is the Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite comparison based on?
9 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Claude Haiku 5.5's coding index rests on 5 independent benchmarks and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.